People v. Barton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barton

126 A.D.3d 1238, 3 N.Y.S.3d 653

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

DecidedMarch 26, 2015

Docket106183

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 126 A.D.3d 1238 (People v. Barton) 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. Barton, 126 A.D.3d 1238, 3 N.Y.S.3d 653 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Lahtinen, J.P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (McDonough, J.), rendered July 31, 2013, *1239 convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the second degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to assault in the second degree in full satisfaction of a three-count indictment and waived his right to appeal. Prior to being sentenced, defendant moved to withdraw his plea. County Court denied the motion and thereafter sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to three years in prison, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the plea colloquy and the counseled written waiver executed by defendant reveal that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see People v Munger, 117 AD3d 1343 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1040 [2014]; People v Osgood, 111 AD3d 1029, 1030 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 1089 [2014]).

As to defendant’s plea, the record reflects that County Court fully informed defendant of the terms of the plea agreement during the plea colloquy, including the negotiated sentence of three years in prison and five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant affirmed that he understood the terms prior to entering his plea, that he had been provided ample time to confer with counsel and that he was satisfied with his representation, and there is nothing in the record that casts doubt upon counsel’s effectiveness (see People v Little, 92 AD3d 1036, 1037 [2012]; People v Graham-Harrison, 272 AD2d 780, 781 [2000]). Defendant’s unsubstantiated claim of innocence was contradicted by his plea, and County Court was within its discretion to reject it (see People v Griffin, 89 AD3d 1235, 1236-1237 [2011]; People v Davis, 250 AD2d 939, 940-941 [1998]). Finally, defendant’s contention that he was advised by defense counsel that he would be sentenced to two years in prison if he pleaded guilty involved a matter outside of the record (see People v Ramos, 63 NY2d 640-642 [1984]; People v Johnson, 77 AD3d 986, 986 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 743 [2011]). Accordingly, we find that County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea.

McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Lahtinen, J.P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (McDonough, J.), rendered July 31, 2013, *1239 convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the second degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to assault in the second degree in full satisfaction of a three-count indictment and waived his right to appeal. Prior to being sentenced, defendant moved to withdraw his plea. County Court denied the motion and thereafter sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to three years in prison, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the plea colloquy and the counseled written waiver executed by defendant reveal that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see People v Munger, 117 AD3d 1343 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1040 [2014]; People v Osgood, 111 AD3d 1029, 1030 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 1089 [2014]).

As to defendant’s plea, the record reflects that County Court fully informed defendant of the terms of the plea agreement during the plea colloquy, including the negotiated sentence of three years in prison and five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant affirmed that he understood the terms prior to entering his plea, that he had been provided ample time to confer with counsel and that he was satisfied with his representation, and there is nothing in the record that casts doubt upon counsel’s effectiveness (see People v Little, 92 AD3d 1036, 1037 [2012]; People v Graham-Harrison, 272 AD2d 780, 781 [2000]). Defendant’s unsubstantiated claim of innocence was contradicted by his plea, and County Court was within its discretion to reject it (see People v Griffin, 89 AD3d 1235, 1236-1237 [2011]; People v Davis, 250 AD2d 939, 940-941 [1998]). Finally, defendant’s contention that he was advised by defense counsel that he would be sentenced to two years in prison if he pleaded guilty involved a matter outside of the record (see People v Ramos, 63 NY2d 640-642 [1984]; People v Johnson, 77 AD3d 986, 986 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 743 [2011]). Accordingly, we find that County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea.

McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.3d 1238, 3 N.Y.S.3d 653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barton-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack