From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rogers

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 25, 1982
434 N.E.2d 1339 (N.Y. 1982)

Opinion

Argued February 17, 1982

Decided March 25, 1982

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, MURRAY KOENIG, J.

Lee Cross for appellant.

Mario Merola, District Attorney ( Peter D. Coddington and Billie Manning of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, not the least of which is that the experienced defendant was the only participant in the plea bargaining process in a position to have firsthand knowledge as to whether the previous conviction was for a felony, we cannot say that the Appellate Division erred in limiting its corrective action to a grant of permission to the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea and substitute one of not guilty (cf. People v McConnell, 49 N.Y.2d 340).

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, WACHTLER and FUCHSBERG concur; Judges JONES and MEYER dissent and vote to reverse for reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum by Justice SAMUEL J. SILVERMAN at the Appellate Division ( 81 A.D.2d 564, 565-566).

Order affirmed in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Rogers

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 25, 1982
434 N.E.2d 1339 (N.Y. 1982)
Case details for

People v. Rogers

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EUGENE ROGERS…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 25, 1982

Citations

434 N.E.2d 1339 (N.Y. 1982)
434 N.E.2d 1339
449 N.Y.S.2d 961

Citing Cases

People v. Sanders

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the defendant's motion is granted, the guilty plea is…

People v. Powell

When a plea is induced by a firm promise which, due to circumstance or law cannot be fulfilled, the defendant…