People v. Wilson
Cases that cite this one
12 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Saunders (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- PeoplevRouse (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Rouse (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Rouse (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Pittman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- PeoplevBarnes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Mauro (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Mauro (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Fate (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Fate (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Barnes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Barnes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Further, the plea colloquy did not cast significant doubt on defendant’s guilt or call into question the voluntariness of his plea so as to implicate the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). In any event, mistake in the inducement cannot be established absent misrepresentation or similar impermissible conduct by state agents and, thus, defendant is bound by his choice to plead guilty where the record does not reflect that such decision was induced by any misrepresentation and the plea was otherwise knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v Griffin, 89 AD3d 1235, 1237 [2011]; People v Trank, 58 AD3d 1076, 1077 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 860 [2009]).
Nor do we find the sentence imposed by County Court to be harsh or excessive taking into account that defendant’s
Peters, P.J., Rose, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.