People v. Manley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Manley

103 A.D.2d 1024, 478 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19725

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

DecidedJuly 13, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 103 A.D.2d 1024 (People v. Manley) 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. Manley, 103 A.D.2d 1024, 478 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19725 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: After question-

ing defendant about his decision to plead guilty to first degree possession of gambling records, the court refused to accept defendant’s plea. Defendant was subsequently tried by a jury and convicted of possession of gambling records in the first degree (Penal Law, § 225.20) and promoting gambling in the first degree (Penal Law, § 225.10). The court’s refusal to accept defendant’s plea was proper. It is well settled that a defendant has no absolute right to have his plea accepted by the court and that the decision whether to accept a reduced plea is a matter within the court’s discretion (Santobello v New York, 404 US 257; People v Griffith, 43 AD2d 20). We do not agree with defendant’s contention [1025]*1025that the court erred in failing to disqualify itself from the trial after hearing incriminating statements by the defendant in the plea colloquy. We have examined the defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Cornelius, J. — promotion of gambling, first degree, and another charge.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Doerr, O’Donnell and Moule, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: After question-

ing defendant about his decision to plead guilty to first degree possession of gambling records, the court refused to accept defendant’s plea. Defendant was subsequently tried by a jury and convicted of possession of gambling records in the first degree (Penal Law, § 225.20) and promoting gambling in the first degree (Penal Law, § 225.10). The court’s refusal to accept defendant’s plea was proper. It is well settled that a defendant has no absolute right to have his plea accepted by the court and that the decision whether to accept a reduced plea is a matter within the court’s discretion (Santobello v New York, 404 US 257; People v Griffith, 43 AD2d 20). We do not agree with defendant’s contention [1025]*1025that the court erred in failing to disqualify itself from the trial after hearing incriminating statements by the defendant in the plea colloquy. We have examined the defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Cornelius, J. — promotion of gambling, first degree, and another charge.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Doerr, O’Donnell and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 A.D.2d 1024, 478 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-manley-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack