People v. Powers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Powers

292 A.D.2d 687, 739 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2454

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

DecidedMarch 14, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 292 A.D.2d 687 (People v. Powers) 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. Powers, 292 A.D.2d 687, 739 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2454 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Peters, J.P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered June 21, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree.

Defendant, who entered a negotiated plea of guilty to the indictment charging him with criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, contends only that County Court erred in denying his request at sentencing to change his guilty plea to an Alford plea. Assuming that the claim survived defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal, it has no merit. In so [688]*688concluding, we are guided by three general principles. First, “[w]here the court which accepts the plea has no reason to believe that the plea is unfair or inappropriate, the bargain becomes final” (People v Francis, 38 NY2d 150, 156). Second, “Alford pleas are—and should be—rare” (Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 474) and third, “pleading guilty to anything less than what is charged or by way of an Alford plea is left entirely to the discretion of the People, subject to County Court’s consent” (People v Haas, 245 AD2d 825, 826). Our review of the record discloses no abuse of discretion in County Court’s denial of defendant’s request.

Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Peters, J.P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered June 21, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree.

Defendant, who entered a negotiated plea of guilty to the indictment charging him with criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, contends only that County Court erred in denying his request at sentencing to change his guilty plea to an Alford plea. Assuming that the claim survived defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal, it has no merit. In so [688]*688concluding, we are guided by three general principles. First, “[w]here the court which accepts the plea has no reason to believe that the plea is unfair or inappropriate, the bargain becomes final” (People v Francis, 38 NY2d 150, 156). Second, “Alford pleas are—and should be—rare” (Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 474) and third, “pleading guilty to anything less than what is charged or by way of an Alford plea is left entirely to the discretion of the People, subject to County Court’s consent” (People v Haas, 245 AD2d 825, 826). Our review of the record discloses no abuse of discretion in County Court’s denial of defendant’s request.

Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 687, 739 N.Y.S.2d 299, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-powers-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack