People v. Slingerland
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtSpain, J.
We affirm. Our review of the record confirms that defendant’s plea and appeal waiver were knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]; People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909, 910-911 [1990]). Defendant argues that the indictment was facially defective in that it failed to specify the location, i.e., exact address, and time at which the offenses were committed. As defendant did not raise these specific claims in *1266his motion to dismiss the indictment (see CPL 210.20, 210.25), they are unpreserved for our review…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- People v. LopezNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
- People v. CallahanNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. IannoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- People v. HansenNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- People v. MoissettNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. CruzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. PorathAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- FONTAINE, JON T., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- LUCIEER, TERRANCE F., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. CruzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.