People v. Hollis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hollis

137 A.D.3d 422, 25 N.Y.S.3d 868

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

DecidedMarch 1, 2016

Docket302/13 352A 1802/13 352

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.3d 422 (People v. Hollis) 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. Hollis, 137 A.D.3d 422, 25 N.Y.S.3d 868 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered January 14, 2014, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of robbery in the first degree and tampering with physical evidence, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s request for new counsel at sentencing, and defendant was not deprived of his right to conflict-free counsel. Defendant, who received a suitable opportunity to be heard both orally and in writing, did not establish good cause for a substitution. Instead, defendant expressed disagreement with counsel’s strategy at a suppression hearing, and generalized, unfounded *423 complaints about counsel’s representation (see People v Smith, 18 NY3d 588, 592-593 [2012]; People v Hopkins, 67 AD3d 471 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 771 [2010]; People v Walton, 14 AD3d 419 [1st Dept 2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 796 [2005]). Defendant never claimed that his attorney coerced him into pleading guilty; in any event, his appellate claim of coercion is without merit. To the extent the record permits review, it establishes that defendant received effective assistance (see generally People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]).

Concur— Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.

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

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered January 14, 2014, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of robbery in the first degree and tampering with physical evidence, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s request for new counsel at sentencing, and defendant was not deprived of his right to conflict-free counsel. Defendant, who received a suitable opportunity to be heard both orally and in writing, did not establish good cause for a substitution. Instead, defendant expressed disagreement with counsel’s strategy at a suppression hearing, and generalized, unfounded *423 complaints about counsel’s representation (see People v Smith, 18 NY3d 588, 592-593 [2012]; People v Hopkins, 67 AD3d 471 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 771 [2010]; People v Walton, 14 AD3d 419 [1st Dept 2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 796 [2005]). Defendant never claimed that his attorney coerced him into pleading guilty; in any event, his appellate claim of coercion is without merit. To the extent the record permits review, it establishes that defendant received effective assistance (see generally People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]).

Concur— Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.3d 422, 25 N.Y.S.3d 868, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hollis-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack