Legal Opinion

People v. Emanuel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 7, 1992PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Defendant argues he did not enter a knowing, voluntary and intelligent plea. The plea minutes indicate otherwise. Defendant, who acknowledged having had ample time to discuss his case with counsel, waived specific constitutional rights (e.g., his rights to a jury trial, to remain silent and to *357cross-examine adverse witnesses), and gave an unequivocal affirmative response to the court’s inquiry whether he had engaged in "sexual intercourse” with the complainant by means of "forcible compulsion”. This record establishes defendant was aware of the consequences of the plea, that he was not…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. WallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. People v. JuncoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
  3. People v. JenkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. OrtizAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  2. People v. RodwellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API