People v. Abdulla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Abdulla

134 A.D.2d 433, 521 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50618

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 16, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 134 A.D.2d 433 (People v. Abdulla) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Abdulla, 134 A.D.2d 433, 521 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50618 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.), rendered December 14, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record demonstrates that the fundamentals of accepting a plea were observed, that the defendant acknowledged facts sufficient to establish the commission of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and that his plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9; People v Spain, 110 AD2d 724). The decision of whether to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously entered guilty plea rests within the sound discretion of the sentencing court (CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Stubbs, 110 AD2d 725, 727; People v Kelsch, 96 AD2d 677, 678). In the instant case, the court afforded the defendant a hearing on the issues of whether he had understood the nature of the plea and whether his plea had been coerced. Significantly, the defendant’s earlier admission of guilt was not accompanied by any claim of innocence. Under the circumstances, the denial of the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea was not an abuse of discretion (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520, 524-525). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.), rendered December 14, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record demonstrates that the fundamentals of accepting a plea were observed, that the defendant acknowledged facts sufficient to establish the commission of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and that his plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9; People v Spain, 110 AD2d 724). The decision of whether to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously entered guilty plea rests within the sound discretion of the sentencing court (CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Stubbs, 110 AD2d 725, 727; People v Kelsch, 96 AD2d 677, 678). In the instant case, the court afforded the defendant a hearing on the issues of whether he had understood the nature of the plea and whether his plea had been coerced. Significantly, the defendant’s earlier admission of guilt was not accompanied by any claim of innocence. Under the circumstances, the denial of the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea was not an abuse of discretion (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520, 524-525). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.D.2d 433, 521 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-abdulla-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack