People v. Diaz

179 A.D.2d 491, 579 N.Y.S.2d 884, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 323
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Diaz. Read the opinion of the Court — 161 A.D.2d 789

Opinion

[492]*492Defendant’s pro se motion to withdraw his plea, in which he claimed innocence, coercion, ineffective assistance of counsel and that he was told the sentence would run concurrently to parole time owed on another felony conviction, was properly denied. In support of the motion, defendant offered only unsubstantiated, bald allegations of innocence, coercion and ignorance as to the ramifications of the plea (People v Kafka, 128 AD2d 895). Moreover, a defendant’s subjective misunderstanding of a promised sentence, which is clearly discussed on the record, does not constitute a basis for vacating a plea. (People v Van Williams, 130 AD2d 788.) Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

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

People v. Diaz, 179 A.D.2d 491, 579 N.Y.S.2d 884, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 323 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

179 A.D.2d 491 (People v. Diaz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Kafka
128 A.D.2d 895 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
People v. Van Williams
130 A.D.2d 788 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)