People v. Mack
90 A.D.3d 784, 934 N.Y.2d 347
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 13, 2011·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
[785]*785Upon this Court’s independent review of the record, we conclude that a nonfrivolous issue exists as to whether the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty (see People v Peoples, 24 AD3d 689, 690 [2005]; People v Terry, 169 AD2d 745, 746 [1991]; see generally Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252, 260 [2d Dept 2011]). Accordingly, assignment of new counsel is warranted. Rivera, J.P, Florio, Eng, Hall and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Mack, 90 A.D.3d 784, 934 N.Y.2d 347 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).
90 A.D.3d 784 (People v. Mack) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Blaylock
126 A.D.3d 811 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)