People v. Campeau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Campeau

300 A.D.2d 1082, 751 N.Y.S.2d 902

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

DecidedDecember 30, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 1082 (People v. Campeau) 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. Campeau, 300 A.D.2d 1082, 751 N.Y.S.2d 902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County (Wolfgang, J.), entered March 8, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of scheme to defraud in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of scheme to defraud in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.60 [former (1) (a)]). We reject the contention of defendant that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his plea (see People v Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 485). Although during the plea allocution defendant reserved the right to withdraw his plea if an agreement could not be reached with respect to restitution, his motion to withdraw the plea was premised upon his subsequent claim of innocence during his presentence interview and upon alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. Defendant’s subsequent claim of innocence was unsupported and thus does not affect the voluntariness of the plea when it was entered (see People v Dixon, 29 NY2d 55, 57; see also People v Jordan, 292 AD2d 860, 861, lv denied 98 NY2d 698). The contention of defendant that defense counsel lied to him regarding his ability to withdraw his plea and thus that he was denied effective assistance of counsel is similarly unsupported by the record. Present — Hayes, J.P., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Burns and Law-toil, JJ.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County (Wolfgang, J.), entered March 8, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of scheme to defraud in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of scheme to defraud in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.60 [former (1) (a)]). We reject the contention of defendant that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his plea (see People v Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 485). Although during the plea allocution defendant reserved the right to withdraw his plea if an agreement could not be reached with respect to restitution, his motion to withdraw the plea was premised upon his subsequent claim of innocence during his presentence interview and upon alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. Defendant’s subsequent claim of innocence was unsupported and thus does not affect the voluntariness of the plea when it was entered (see People v Dixon, 29 NY2d 55, 57; see also People v Jordan, 292 AD2d 860, 861, lv denied 98 NY2d 698). The contention of defendant that defense counsel lied to him regarding his ability to withdraw his plea and thus that he was denied effective assistance of counsel is similarly unsupported by the record. Present — Hayes, J.P., Hurlbutt, Kehoe, Burns and Law-toil, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 1082, 751 N.Y.S.2d 902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-campeau-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack