People v. Claudio

• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: WACHTLER
• Citation: People v. Claudio, 64 N.Y.2d 858, 487 N.Y.S.2d 318, 476 N.E.2d 644 (N.Y. 1985)
• Decision Date: 14 February 1985
• Parties: , 476 N.E.2d 644 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Pedro CLAUDIO, Appellant.

Page 318

487 N.Y.S.2d 318

64 N.Y.2d 858, 476 N.E.2d 644

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Pedro CLAUDIO, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Feb. 14, 1985.

David Steinberg, Poughkeepsie, for appellant.

William V. Grady, Dist. Atty. (Joan H. McCarthy, Fishkill, of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division, 103 A.D.2d 1047, 479 N.Y.S.2d 390, should be affirmed.

Defendant's contention that his warrantless arrest in a public place was invalid because felony complaints charging him with the crimes for which he was arrested had already been filed has not been preserved for review by any argument or objection made in a written motion or at the suppression hearing. The additional claim with respect to County Court's ruling on defendant's Sandoval application was not preserved and, therefore, does not present an issue reviewable by this court (see, People v. Shields, 46 N.Y.2d 764, 765, 413 N.Y.S.2d 649, 386 N.E.2d 257). Finally, the argument that defendant's guilty plea should not have been accepted is also not preserved for appellate review because defendant neither moved to withdraw the plea before sentencing nor raised the issue by a motion to vacate the judgment of conviction (People v. Bell, 47 N.Y.2d...