People v. Bernard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bernard

2017 NY Slip Op 8388, 155 A.D.3d 1059, 65 N.Y.S.3d 457

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

DecidedNovember 29, 2017

Docket2014-11248

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 8388 (People v. Bernard) 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. Bernard, 2017 NY Slip Op 8388, 155 A.D.3d 1059, 65 N.Y.S.3d 457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Toomey, J.), rendered November 6, 2014, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The determination of a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the County Court (see CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 485 [2002]; People v Oden, 150 AD3d 1269, 1270 [2017]). Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s pro se oral application, in effect, to withdraw his plea of guilty, which was made at the time of sentencing. The record establishes that the defendant’s plea was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Tyrell, 22 NY3d 359, 365 [2013]; People v Haffiz, 19 NY3d 883, 885 [2012]; People v Bediako, 119 AD3d 598 [2014]).

Since the only substantive argument raised on the defendant’s appeal concerns the voluntariness of his plea, which claim survives a valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]), we need not reach the defendant’s contention that his appeal waiver was invalid.

Mastro, J.P., Chambers, LaSalle and Brathwaite Nelson, 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 County Court, Suffolk County (Toomey, J.), rendered November 6, 2014, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The determination of a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the County Court (see CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 485 [2002]; People v Oden, 150 AD3d 1269, 1270 [2017]). Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s pro se oral application, in effect, to withdraw his plea of guilty, which was made at the time of sentencing. The record establishes that the defendant’s plea was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Tyrell, 22 NY3d 359, 365 [2013]; People v Haffiz, 19 NY3d 883, 885 [2012]; People v Bediako, 119 AD3d 598 [2014]).

Since the only substantive argument raised on the defendant’s appeal concerns the voluntariness of his plea, which claim survives a valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]), we need not reach the defendant’s contention that his appeal waiver was invalid.

Mastro, J.P., Chambers, LaSalle and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 8388, 155 A.D.3d 1059, 65 N.Y.S.3d 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bernard-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack