People v. Gomez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gomez

174 A.D.2d 949, 571 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9209

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

DecidedJune 27, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 174 A.D.2d 949 (People v. Gomez) 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. Gomez, 174 A.D.2d 949, 571 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9209 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered September 14, 1990, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.

Contrary to defendant’s contentions, it cannot be said that County Court abused its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea (see, People v Franco, 145 AD2d 837, 837-838; People v Lattmen, 101 AD2d 662, 663). First, a review of the minutes of the plea allocution indicates that defendant, who was provided with a Spanish interpreter, fully comprehended the nature of the proceedings and knowingly entered his plea. Defendant was fully advised of all of his rights and admitted to selling cocaine which he knew to be illegal. In response to the court’s questioning as to whether he was under the influence of any medication or drug, defendant indicated that he felt "well” and that his mind was clear. Further, the affidavit of defendant’s treating physician stated that none of the prescribed drugs that defendant was taking directly affected cognition, nor was there any other evidence presented that he suffered from any side effects from the medication which would impair his ability in any way. Under the circumstances, defendant’s conviction must be affirmed (see, People v Seger, 171 AD2d 892; People v Gosso, 130 AD2d 683, lv denied 70 NY2d 712). We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered September 14, 1990, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.

Contrary to defendant’s contentions, it cannot be said that County Court abused its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea (see, People v Franco, 145 AD2d 837, 837-838; People v Lattmen, 101 AD2d 662, 663). First, a review of the minutes of the plea allocution indicates that defendant, who was provided with a Spanish interpreter, fully comprehended the nature of the proceedings and knowingly entered his plea. Defendant was fully advised of all of his rights and admitted to selling cocaine which he knew to be illegal. In response to the court’s questioning as to whether he was under the influence of any medication or drug, defendant indicated that he felt "well” and that his mind was clear. Further, the affidavit of defendant’s treating physician stated that none of the prescribed drugs that defendant was taking directly affected cognition, nor was there any other evidence presented that he suffered from any side effects from the medication which would impair his ability in any way. Under the circumstances, defendant’s conviction must be affirmed (see, People v Seger, 171 AD2d 892; People v Gosso, 130 AD2d 683, lv denied 70 NY2d 712). We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 949, 571 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gomez-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack