People v. Payne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Payne

176 A.D.2d 827

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 15, 1991·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Heller, J.), rendered January 16, 1990, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The determination of whether to allow a defendant to adjourn sentencing proceedings or to withdraw a guilty plea rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be disturbed unless there is a clear abuse of that discretion (see, CPL 220.60 [3]; 380.30 [3]; People v Howard, 138 AD2d 525; People v Melendez, 135 AD2d 660; People v Stubbs, 110 AD2d 725, 727). In this case, we find that the court did not abuse its discretion since there were no grounds shown in the [828]*828record warranting an adjournment or withdrawal of the defendant’s plea (see, People v Billingsley, 54 NY2d 960, 961; People v Brown, 142 AD2d 683; People v Morris, 118 AD2d 595, 596; People v Stubbs, supra, at 727). Bracken, J. P., Hooper, Lawrence, Balletta and O’Brien, 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 (Heller, J.), rendered January 16, 1990, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The determination of whether to allow a defendant to adjourn sentencing proceedings or to withdraw a guilty plea rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be disturbed unless there is a clear abuse of that discretion (see, CPL 220.60 [3]; 380.30 [3]; People v Howard, 138 AD2d 525; People v Melendez, 135 AD2d 660; People v Stubbs, 110 AD2d 725, 727). In this case, we find that the court did not abuse its discretion since there were no grounds shown in the [828]*828record warranting an adjournment or withdrawal of the defendant’s plea (see, People v Billingsley, 54 NY2d 960, 961; People v Brown, 142 AD2d 683; People v Morris, 118 AD2d 595, 596; People v Stubbs, supra, at 727). Bracken, J. P., Hooper, Lawrence, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

People v. Payne, 176 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

176 A.D.2d 827 (People v. Payne) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related