People v. Dunbar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dunbar

260 A.D.2d 644, 687 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4261

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

DecidedApril 26, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 260 A.D.2d 644 (People v. Dunbar) 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. Dunbar, 260 A.D.2d 644, 687 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4261 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Angiolillo, J.), rendered June 25, 1997, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. The defendant’s conclusory and unsupported assertion of innocence, and claim that he was pressured into pleading guilty, did not warrant vacating his plea (see, People v Barnett, 258 AD2d 526; People v Quijada-Lopez, 256 AD2d 478). Additionally, his contention that his medication made it impossible for him to understand and appreciate the proceedings is contradicted by the record of the plea proceedings (see, People v Quijada-Lopez, supra; People v DeLeon, 254 AD2d 430; People v Waters, 252 AD2d 564). Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, 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, Westchester County (Angiolillo, J.), rendered June 25, 1997, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. The defendant’s conclusory and unsupported assertion of innocence, and claim that he was pressured into pleading guilty, did not warrant vacating his plea (see, People v Barnett, 258 AD2d 526; People v Quijada-Lopez, 256 AD2d 478). Additionally, his contention that his medication made it impossible for him to understand and appreciate the proceedings is contradicted by the record of the plea proceedings (see, People v Quijada-Lopez, supra; People v DeLeon, 254 AD2d 430; People v Waters, 252 AD2d 564). Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 644, 687 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dunbar-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack