People v. Smith
| Decision Date | 10 March 1989 |
| Citation | 539 N.Y.S.2d 216,148 A.D.2d 980 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph P. SMITH, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Helen Zimmermann by Dianne Trippany, Buffalo, for appellant.
Kevin M. Dillon by Susan Nusbaum, Buffalo, for respondent.
Before DOERR, J.P., and DENMAN, BOOMER, BALIO and DAVIS, JJ.
The court properly accepted defendant's plea of guilty to one count of burglary in the second degree in full satisfaction of the indictment. Contrary to defendant's contention, his recitation of the events underlying the crime did not indicate that his level of intoxication negated the essential element of intent (cf. People v. Benton, 143 A.D.2d 526, 533 N.Y.S.2d 32; People v. Tomaino, 134 A.D.2d 859, 521 N.Y.S.2d 596). Consequently, there was no duty upon the court to make further inquiry prior to accepting defendant's guilty plea (see, People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5; People v. Beasley, 25 N.Y.2d 483, 307 N.Y.S.2d 39, 255 N.E.2d 239). Finally, we reject defendant's claim that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh and excessive (see, People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 305, 437 N.Y.S.2d 961, 419 N.E.2d 864; People v. Martinez, 124 A.D.2d 505, 506, 508 N.Y.S.2d 180).
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Steiner
-
People v. Smallwood
...or intoxication, and the court was not obliged to expand upon the inquiry conducted by the prosecutor (see, People v. Smith, 148 A.D.2d 980, 539 N.Y.S.2d 216, lv. denied 74 N.Y.2d 747, 545 N.Y.S.2d 122, 543 N.E.2d 765; People v. Bruno, 147 A.D.2d 490, 537 N.Y.S.2d The People concede that th......
- People v. Smith