People v. Moss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Moss

193 A.D.2d 628, 598 N.Y.S.2d 965, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4594

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

DecidedMay 3, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 193 A.D.2d 628 (People v. Moss) 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. Moss, 193 A.D.2d 628, 598 N.Y.S.2d 965, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4594 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), rendered February 14, 1992, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[629]*629Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty without conducting a hearing (see, CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Mitchell, 187 AD2d 676; People v Dickerson, 163 AD2d 610). In addition, we reject the defendant’s contention that he was denied due process by the court’s substitution of assigned counsel when original assigned counsel was unable to appear. Nor was the defendant denied the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v Sawyer, 57 NY2d 12, cert denied 459 US 1178; People v Willis, 147 AD2d 727; Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). Thompson, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Eiber, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), rendered February 14, 1992, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[629]*629Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty without conducting a hearing (see, CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Mitchell, 187 AD2d 676; People v Dickerson, 163 AD2d 610). In addition, we reject the defendant’s contention that he was denied due process by the court’s substitution of assigned counsel when original assigned counsel was unable to appear. Nor was the defendant denied the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v Sawyer, 57 NY2d 12, cert denied 459 US 1178; People v Willis, 147 AD2d 727; Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137). Thompson, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 A.D.2d 628, 598 N.Y.S.2d 965, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-moss-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack