People v. Kaye

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kaye

91 A.D.2d 690, 457 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19571

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 91 A.D.2d 690 (People v. Kaye) 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. Kaye, 91 A.D.2d 690, 457 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19571 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeals by defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), both rendered May 15, 1979, convicting him of two counts of robbery in the first degree, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial, without a hearing, of the defendant’s motion to vacate his guilty pleas. Judgments affirmed. Under the circumstances of this case, the County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty pleas, particularly where the defendant’s contentions were fully set forth in his motion papers, he did not dispute his complicity in the underlying crimes and [691]*691the record provided an unequivocal basis for the rejection of his claims (see People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520, 524-525; People v Friedman, 39 NY2d 463; People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926; see, also, People v Harris, 79 AD2d 615). We have considered the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be lacking in merit. Damiani, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Bracken, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeals by defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), both rendered May 15, 1979, convicting him of two counts of robbery in the first degree, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial, without a hearing, of the defendant’s motion to vacate his guilty pleas. Judgments affirmed. Under the circumstances of this case, the County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty pleas, particularly where the defendant’s contentions were fully set forth in his motion papers, he did not dispute his complicity in the underlying crimes and [691]*691the record provided an unequivocal basis for the rejection of his claims (see People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520, 524-525; People v Friedman, 39 NY2d 463; People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926; see, also, People v Harris, 79 AD2d 615). We have considered the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be lacking in merit. Damiani, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Bracken, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A.D.2d 690, 457 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kaye-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack