PEOPLE v. TSINTZELIS (2022)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George TSINTZELIS, Appellant.

2019-1076 Q CR

Decided: January 07, 2022

PRESENT: THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, P.J., WAVNY TOUSSAINT, DONNA-MARIE E. GOLIA, JJ.

New York City Legal Aid Society (Tomoeh Murakami Tse of counsel), for appellant. Queens County District Attorney (Johnnette Traill, Ellen C. Abbot and Jordan LoCascio of counsel), for respondent.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Upon a review of the record, we find no merit to defendant's sole appellate contention that the statements made by a judge, at a calendar call which took place almost five months prior to defendant's plea of guilty before a different judge, were coercive and rendered his subsequent guilty plea involuntary as a matter of law. Defendant's responses to the court's inquiries during the plea proceeding show that his plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 283 [1992]), and that no threats or promises had induced the plea (see People v Ramos-Perez, 188 AD3d 1741, 1742 [2020]; People v Jenkins, 117 AD3d 1528, 1528 [2014]). Also, there was nothing in the plea allocution that casts significant doubt on defendant's guilt (see People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725 [1995]).

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., TOUSSAINT and GOLIA, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network