Judicial Insight
Back to feed
& (defendant can challenge the plea)CriminalCourt of AppealsAppeal

People v. Clegg

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided
Oct 2, 2026
Docket
693 KA 24-01040
Judges
Not listed
Cited as2026 NY Slip Op 05662
Detailed analysis & 3-line summary

AI breakdown

Analyzed Oct 4, 2026

Where this case stands

  1. Supreme Court: convicted defendant on a guilty plea for criminal sale of a controlled substance.

  2. This decision · Appeal

    & (defendant can challenge the plea)

TL;DR

  1. 1The defendant claims he was not given a fair plea deal when he pleaded guilty to selling drugs.
  2. 2The appellate court the 's decision, allowing the plea to be challenged.
  3. 3This decision was made because the court found issues with how the plea was handled.

Key issues

  1. 1

    Did the defendant receive a fair plea deal?

    Holding · The court ruled that the defendant's plea was unfair, which requires further proceedings.

Why it matters

This case affects the defendant's ability to contest his conviction and ensures that plea deals are handled fairly.

The AI breakdown is a reading aid, not legal advice. Always check the opinion for the exact wording.

If you were the judge?

The defendant claims his guilty plea was unfair. Should it be kept or thrown out?

  1. 1The defendant pleaded guilty to selling drugs but argues that the plea deal was not fair to him.
  2. 2He says that important information was not shared with him before he agreed to the plea.
  3. 3Now, the court must decide whether to keep the guilty plea or allow him to challenge it further.

Should the appellate court overturn the defendant's guilty plea?

Parties

  • Prosecution

    People

  • Appellee

    Clegg

Roles are inferred from the case caption.

Opinion of the court
People v Clegg 2026 NY Slip Op 05662 October 2, 2026 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v BOBBY L. CLEGG, III, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.) Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department Decided on October 2, 2026 693 KA 24-01040 Present: Whalen, P.J., Lindley, Bannister, Delconte, And Hannah, JJ. LEANNE LAPP, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES ECKERT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. JASON A. MACBRIDE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (MICHAEL R. STASZKIW OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Craig J. Doran, J.), rendered September 13, 2023. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. [*1] It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law, the plea is vacated, and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Ontario County, for further proceedings on the indictment. Same memorandum as in People v Clegg ([appeal No. 2] — AD3d — [October 2, 2026] [4th Dept 2026]). Entered: October 2, 2026 Ann Dillon Flynn Clerk of the Court
View on CourtListener