People v. Hawley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hawley

305 A.D.2d 167, 757 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5262

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

DecidedMay 8, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 167 (People v. Hawley) 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. Hawley, 305 A.D.2d 167, 757 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5262 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), rendered November 19, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 8V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

After giving defendant a suitable opportunity to be heard, the court properly denied defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The court, which was familiar with the plea proceedings, properly rejected defendant’s claim that he was under the influence of drugs at the time of the plea (see People v Bess, 299 AD2d 263 [2002]). The plea allocution record establishes that defendant was completely lucid and that he entered his plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), rendered November 19, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 8V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

After giving defendant a suitable opportunity to be heard, the court properly denied defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The court, which was familiar with the plea proceedings, properly rejected defendant’s claim that he was under the influence of drugs at the time of the plea (see People v Bess, 299 AD2d 263 [2002]). The plea allocution record establishes that defendant was completely lucid and that he entered his plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 167, 757 N.Y.S.2d 858, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hawley-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack