People v. Magwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Magwood

286 A.D.2d 878, 730 N.Y.S.2d 892, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9064

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 286 A.D.2d 878 (People v. Magwood) 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. Magwood, 286 A.D.2d 878, 730 N.Y.S.2d 892, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9064 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]). We reject the contention of defendant that her plea, which included her waiver of the right to appeal, was not knowingly and voluntarily entered. County Court properly considered all the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the plea before accepting it, including defendant’s physical and mental condition (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11). We also reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying her request for new counsel and defense counsel’s request to withdraw (see generally, People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824). The court made a detailed inquiry into the reasons for defendant’s dissatisfaction with defense counsel before denying those requests and properly determined that defendant failed to establish good cause for substitution of counsel (see, People v Kirkman, 269 AD2d 808, lv denied 95 NY2d 836; People v Estwick, 266 AD2d 123, lv denied 94 NY2d 918; People v Donovan, 248 AD2d 895, lv denied 92 NY2d 851). (Appeal from Judgment of Wayne County Court, Kehoe, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Hayes, Burns and Lawton, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]). We reject the contention of defendant that her plea, which included her waiver of the right to appeal, was not knowingly and voluntarily entered. County Court properly considered all the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the plea before accepting it, including defendant’s physical and mental condition (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11). We also reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying her request for new counsel and defense counsel’s request to withdraw (see generally, People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824). The court made a detailed inquiry into the reasons for defendant’s dissatisfaction with defense counsel before denying those requests and properly determined that defendant failed to establish good cause for substitution of counsel (see, People v Kirkman, 269 AD2d 808, lv denied 95 NY2d 836; People v Estwick, 266 AD2d 123, lv denied 94 NY2d 918; People v Donovan, 248 AD2d 895, lv denied 92 NY2d 851). (Appeal from Judgment of Wayne County Court, Kehoe, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Hayes, Burns and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 878, 730 N.Y.S.2d 892, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-magwood-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack