People v McDonald

Annotate this Case
People v Mcdonald 2015 NY Slip Op 00993 Decided on February 6, 2015 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 6, 2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.
34 KA 14-00040

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

ISAAC L. MCDONALD, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Sara S. Farkas, J.), rendered December 11, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the third degree, disseminating indecent materials to minors in the first degree and failure to register internet identifiers.



ROBERT M. PUSATERI, CONFLICT DEFENDER, LOCKPORT (EDWARD P. PERLMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL J. VIOLANTE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (LAURA T. BITTNER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



It is hereby ORDERED that the case is held, the decision is reserved, and the matter is remitted to Niagara County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of, inter alia, rape in the third degree (Penal Law § 130.25 [2]). We agree with defendant that County Court failed to rule on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Contrary to the People's contention, we cannot "deem the court's failure to rule on the . . . motion as a denial thereof" (People v Spratley, 96 AD3d 1420, 1421; see People v Concepcion, 17 NY3d 192, 197-198). We therefore hold the case, reserve decision, and remit the matter to County Court to determine defendant's motion.

Entered: February 6, 2015

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.