People v. Losicco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Losicco

137 A.D.2d 621, 524 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1029

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

DecidedFebruary 8, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 137 A.D.2d 621 (People v. Losicco) 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. Losicco, 137 A.D.2d 621, 524 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1029 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Santagata, J.), rendered October 31, 1986, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The County Court did not abuse its discretion (see, CPL 220.60 [3]) in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea without an evidentiary hearing (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520; People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926, 927). The defendant’s conclusory assertions that he was "sick” and "confused” when he entered his plea of guilty to 1 reduced [622]*622count in satisfaction of an 11-count indictment are refuted by the record of the plea allocution (see, People v Corwise, 120 AD2d 604; cf., People v King, 110 AD2d 856). His bald allegation of innocence did not entitle him to withdraw his guilty plea (see, People v Matta, 103 AD2d 756; People v Stubbs, 92 AD2d 923). The inquiry conducted by the County Court was sufficient for determination of the motion, which was properly denied. Mangano, J. P., Kunzeman, Rubin, Kooper and Harwood, 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, Nassau County (Santagata, J.), rendered October 31, 1986, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The County Court did not abuse its discretion (see, CPL 220.60 [3]) in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea without an evidentiary hearing (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520; People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926, 927). The defendant’s conclusory assertions that he was "sick” and "confused” when he entered his plea of guilty to 1 reduced [622]*622count in satisfaction of an 11-count indictment are refuted by the record of the plea allocution (see, People v Corwise, 120 AD2d 604; cf., People v King, 110 AD2d 856). His bald allegation of innocence did not entitle him to withdraw his guilty plea (see, People v Matta, 103 AD2d 756; People v Stubbs, 92 AD2d 923). The inquiry conducted by the County Court was sufficient for determination of the motion, which was properly denied. Mangano, J. P., Kunzeman, Rubin, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.2d 621, 524 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-losicco-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack