Majority
Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law and facts, plea vacated and defendant remanded to Supreme Court, Erie County, for further proceedings on the indictment. Memorandum: Defendant entered a plea of guilty to a charge of robbery in the first degree as set forth in the thircl count of the indictment. That count alleged that during the commission of the crime, defendant “displayed what appeared to be a revolver”. On the plea allocution, defendant admitted that he displayed a revolver but stated that it contained no bullets. That assertion prompted the court to inquire “The gun wasn’t loaded?” and defendant answered “No, sir.”
It is an affirmative defense to robbery in the first degree that the weapon used during the commission of the crime was not loaded (Penal Law, § 160.15, subd 4). It was thus error for the court to accept defendant’s plea without making further inquiry to establish its basis (People v Serrano, 15 NY2d 304 ; People v Royster, 91 AD2d 1074 ; People v Hassan, 79 AD2d 713 ).
We reject the People’s argument that because defendant did not move to vacate his plea prior to sentencing, the issue is not preserved for review (see People v Moore, 91 AD2d 1050 ). It is the rule that a claimed deficiency in plea allocution is not preserved for review where it was not raised “by motion to
Cases cited
- People v. Serrano 15 NY2d 304 p. 1053
- People v. Pellegrino 60 NY2d 636 at 637 p. 1054
- People v. Bell 47 NY2d 839 at 840 p. 1054
- People v. Warren 47 NY2d 740 at 741 p. 1054