People v Glasper
2007 NY Slip Op 10266 [46 AD3d 1401]
December 21, 2007
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, February 13, 2008


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v NormanGlasper, Appellant.

[*1]Paul M. Deep, Utica, for defendant-appellant.

Scott D. McNamara, District Attorney, Utica (Steven G. Cox of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Oneida County Court (Barry M. Donalty, J.), renderedOctober 3, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of murder in thesecond degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby isunanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of murderin the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [1]), defendant contends that his waiver of theright to appeal is invalid and that his plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered because thefactual allocution negated his intent to kill the victim, an essential element of the crime to whichhe pleaded guilty. Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes that County Court"engage[d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appealwas a knowing and voluntary choice" (People v Kemp, 255 AD2d 397, 397 [1998]; cf. People v Thousand, 41 AD3d1272 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 927 [2007]; People v Brown, 296 AD2d 860[2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 767 [2002]). Although defendant's contention that the pleawas not knowingly and voluntarily entered survives defendant's valid waiver of the right toappeal (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]; People v Holifield, 34 AD3d 1316 [2006], lv denied 8NY3d 846 [2007]), we conclude that it is lacking merit. Even assuming, arguendo, that defendantnegated an essential element of the crime during the plea colloquy, we conclude that the courtconducted the requisite further inquiry to ensure that defendant understood the nature of thecharge and that the plea was intelligently entered (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666[1988]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Gorski, Lunn, Fahey and Peradotto, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.