People v. Badger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Badger

288 A.D.2d 485, 733 N.Y.S.2d 498, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11426

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

DecidedNovember 26, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 288 A.D.2d 485 (People v. Badger) 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. Badger, 288 A.D.2d 485, 733 N.Y.S.2d 498, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11426 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Katz, J.), rendered June 3, 1999, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The determination whether to permit the withdrawal of a plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the court (see, People v Marzocco, 278 AD2d 515; People v McAllister, 248 AD2d 641; People v Flakes, 240 AD2d 428). The defendant’s unsubstantiated claim of innocence was refuted by an earlier admission of guilt (see, People v Marzocco, supra; People v McAllister, supra; People v Flakes, supra). Thus, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea without a hearing (see, People v Marzocco, supra; People v McAllister, supra; People v Flakes, supra; cf., People v De Jesus, 199 AD2d 529). Ritter, J. P., Feuerstein, Townes and Prudenti, 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, Queens County (Katz, J.), rendered June 3, 1999, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The determination whether to permit the withdrawal of a plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the court (see, People v Marzocco, 278 AD2d 515; People v McAllister, 248 AD2d 641; People v Flakes, 240 AD2d 428). The defendant’s unsubstantiated claim of innocence was refuted by an earlier admission of guilt (see, People v Marzocco, supra; People v McAllister, supra; People v Flakes, supra). Thus, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea without a hearing (see, People v Marzocco, supra; People v McAllister, supra; People v Flakes, supra; cf., People v De Jesus, 199 AD2d 529). Ritter, J. P., Feuerstein, Townes and Prudenti, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 485, 733 N.Y.S.2d 498, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-badger-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack