People v. Rivera-Santana

2023 NY Slip Op 05101
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 10, 2023
DocketInd. No. 1250/18 Appeal No. 733 Case No. 2019-04016
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2023 NY Slip Op 05101 (People v. Rivera-Santana) 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. Rivera-Santana, 2023 NY Slip Op 05101 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

People v Rivera-Santana (2023 NY Slip Op 05101)
People v Rivera-Santana
2023 NY Slip Op 05101
Decided on October 10, 2023
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered: October 10, 2023
Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Gesmer, González, Kennedy, O'Neill Levy, JJ.

Ind. No. 1250/18 Appeal No. 733 Case No. 2019-04016

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Manuel Rivera-Santana, Defendant-Appellant.


Jenay Nurse Guilford, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Jan Hoth of counsel), for appellant.

Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Julianna Sousou of counsel), for respondent.



Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Warhit, J.), rendered June 12, 2019, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 5½ years, held in abeyance, and the matter remitted for further proceedings on defendant's motion to withdraw his plea, with new counsel assigned.

Before sentencing, defendant made a written pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea, asserting, among other things, deficiencies in defense counsel's performance with respect to the plea. The court assigned defendant new counsel, and the People opposed defendant's motion. At the outset of the sentencing hearing, the court asked counsel if he was seeking an adjournment to supplement defendant's pro se motion, and counsel responded: "No, I am not, and I am not adopting it because I read the People's [opposition] and reviewed the case law on this issue and it really doesn't seem to be worthy of asking for my client to take his plea back." Under the circumstances, counsel took a position adverse to defendant, requiring assignment of new counsel on the motion (see People v Washington, 25 NY3d 1091, 1095 [2015]; People v Mitchell, 21 NY3d 964, 967 [2013]; People v Colson, 160 AD3d 579 [1st Dept 2018]).THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: October 10, 2023



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

Related

People v. Rivera-Santana
2023 NY Slip Op 05101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2023 NY Slip Op 05101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rivera-santana-nyappdiv-2023.