People v. Respass

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Respass

186 A.D.2d 830

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

DecidedOctober 26, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 830 (People v. Respass) 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. Respass, 186 A.D.2d 830 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Chetta, J.), rendered March 28, 1989, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Upon our review of the record, we find no error in the court’s denial, without a hearing, of the defendant’s pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The allegations of coercion made by the defendant were flatly refuted by the plea record and there was no indication that the plea was improvident or baseless (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520). Nor do we find any merit in the defendant’s contention that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Harwood, Balletta, Rosenblatt and Fiber, 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, Queens County (Chetta, J.), rendered March 28, 1989, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Upon our review of the record, we find no error in the court’s denial, without a hearing, of the defendant’s pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The allegations of coercion made by the defendant were flatly refuted by the plea record and there was no indication that the plea was improvident or baseless (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520). Nor do we find any merit in the defendant’s contention that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Harwood, Balletta, Rosenblatt and Fiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-respass-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack