At page 503 Denying motion to withdraw guilty plea based on coercion8 citing cases
- People v. Solis, 111 A.D.3d 654 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013).published In any event, the defendant’s claims of coercion are belied by his statements under oath on the record acknowledging that no one had forced or coerced him to plead guilty and that he was pleading guilty voluntarily (see People v Duncan, 78…
- People v. Jacob, 94 A.D.3d 1142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2012).publishedThe defendant’s assertion that his attorney coerced him into pleading guilty is belied by the record (see People v Duncan, 78 AD3d 1193 [2010]; People v Haffiz, 77 AD3d at 768 ; People v Turner, 23 AD3d 503, 503-504 [2005]).
- People v. Douglas, 83 A.D.3d 1092 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011).publishedThe defendant’s assertions that defense counsel forced him to plead guilty and that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel are belied by his statements under oath on the record acknowledging that his plea had not been coerc…
- People v. Robinson, 81 A.D.3d 859 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011).publishedContrary to the defendant’s contention, the plea minutes reveal that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered into a plea of guilty (see People v Gedin, 46 AD3d 701 [2007]; People v Gutierrez, 35 AD 3d 883 [2006]; People v Turn…
- People v. Duncan, 78 A.D.3d 1193 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010).publishedThe defendant’s claim of coercion is belied by his statements under oath on the record expressing satisfaction with his attorney’s representation and acknowledging that no one had coerced his plea (see People v Turner, 23 AD3d 503, 503-504…
- People v. Wiedmer, 71 A.D.3d 1067 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010).publishedThe defendant’s unsubstantiated claim that his plea was coerced was refuted by his statements during the plea allocution (see People v Hughes, 62 AD3d at 1026; People v Turner, 23 AD3d 503, 503-504 [2005]), as was his claim that his plea w…
- People v. Johnson, 71 A.D.3d 1048 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010).publishedIn any event, the Supreme Court gave the defendant correct information regarding his sentencing exposure, and the defendant’s plea of guilty was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered after the court fully advised him of the con…
At page 504 cited at this page1 citing case
- People v. Jackson, 56 A.D.2d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2008).publishedAdditionally, the defendant’s attorney did not take a position adverse to his client so as to create a conflict of interest between the two (see People v Turner, 23 AD3d 503, 504 [2005]).
v.
Anthony Turner
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Braun, J.), rendered January 27, 2005, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is addressed to the sound discretion of the court (see People v Granton, 236 AD2d 624 [1997]; People v McGriff, 216 AD2d 330 [1995]). In this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. The defendant’s claim that defense counsel coerced him into pleading guilty is without merit. The defendant knowingly and voluntarily admitted his guilt in a thorough and complete allocution, during which he stated that no one, including defense counsel, had coerced his plea (see People v Harris, 222 AD2d[*504] 522 [1995]; People v Richardson, 214 AD2d 624 [1995]; People v Hall, 195 AD2d 521 [1993]). The Supreme Court’s careful and thorough inquiry and explanation ensured that the defendant’s decision to plead guilty was his own.
The defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered his plea of guilty, and there is no suggestion that the plea was improvident or baseless (see People v Leo, 255 AD2d 458, 459 [1998]; People v Menard, 187 AD2d 458, 459 [1992]; People v DeGraff, 186 AD2d 752, 753 [1992]). Indeed, before accepting the defendant’s plea, the Supreme Court carefully questioned the defendant about his decision to plead guilty and ensured beyond peradventure that he was making an informed, voluntary choice to plead guilty (cf. People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 16 [1983]). Additionally, the defendant admitted that he was, in fact, guilty of the charged crimes.
The defendant failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at the plea proceeding. Defense counsel did not take a position adverse to his client such that there was a conflict of interest between the two. Additionally, the defendant failed to demonstrate that counsel inadequately informed him of the terms of a previous plea offer. On this record, the defendant was afforded meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 [1981]). Adams, J.P., Crane, S. Miller and Mastro, JJ., concur.