People v. Madden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Madden

186 A.D.2d 49, 587 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10590

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

DecidedSeptember 17, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 49 (People v. Madden) 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. Madden, 186 A.D.2d 49, 587 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10590 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered July 2, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment of 1 to 3 years, to run consecutively to an unrelated 1 year term of imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

The court was not obligated sua sponte to offer defendant an opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea after his arrest on an unrelated charge. Whether to permit withdrawal of a plea is, rather, a matter left to the court’s discretion (CPL 220.60 [3]; see, People v Miller, 42 NY2d 946). No abuse of discretion has been shown here, defendant having breached the conditions of the plea agreement.

In light of defendant’s rearrest following his plea (see, People v Harrison, 161 AD2d 550, lv denied 76 NY2d 858) and his extensive criminal history, the sentence was neither harsh nor excessive. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered July 2, 1990, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment of 1 to 3 years, to run consecutively to an unrelated 1 year term of imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

The court was not obligated sua sponte to offer defendant an opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea after his arrest on an unrelated charge. Whether to permit withdrawal of a plea is, rather, a matter left to the court’s discretion (CPL 220.60 [3]; see, People v Miller, 42 NY2d 946). No abuse of discretion has been shown here, defendant having breached the conditions of the plea agreement.

In light of defendant’s rearrest following his plea (see, People v Harrison, 161 AD2d 550, lv denied 76 NY2d 858) and his extensive criminal history, the sentence was neither harsh nor excessive. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 49, 587 N.Y.S.2d 637, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10590, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-madden-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack