People v. Smiley

67 A.D.3d 713, 886 N.Y.S.2d 893
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 4, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 67 A.D.3d 713 (People v. Smiley) 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. Smiley, 67 A.D.3d 713, 886 N.Y.S.2d 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, by permission, from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.), dated January 22, 2008, which denied, without a hearing, his motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate a judgment of the same court rendered November 3, 2000, convicting him of attempted murder in the [714]*714second degree (two counts), assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erroneously denied, without a hearing, his motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate his judgment of conviction on the ground that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. In support of his CPL 440.10 motion, the defendant submitted his own affidavit wherein he alleged that trial counsel failed to inform him of the maximum sentence he faced in the event that he chose to reject a particular plea offer, and failed to recognize and advise him of the possibility that he could face consecutive sentences. The defendant claimed that had he known this information, he would not have rejected the plea offer. Since the defendant’s self-serving allegations are not supported by any other affidavit or evidence, and under all the circumstances attending the case, there is no reasonable possibility that such allegations are true, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion without a hearing (see CPL 440.30 [4] [d]; see also People v Green, 200 AD2d 687 [1994]; People v Pachay, 185 AD2d 287 [1992]; cf. People v Mobley, 59 AD3d 741, 742 [2009]). Skelos, J.P., Florio, Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Crampton
201 A.D.3d 1020 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Bertolini
2020 NY Slip Op 4402 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Allen
2019 NY Slip Op 5784 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Khalapov
133 A.D.3d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Leftenant
121 A.D.3d 1019 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Bonilla
41 Misc. 3d 894 (New York Supreme Court, 2013)
People v. Soodoo
109 A.D.3d 1014 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
SANTANA, ALBERT, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012
People v. Santana
101 A.D.3d 1664 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Jenkins v. Greene
630 F.3d 298 (Second Circuit, 2010)
People v. Kabre
29 Misc. 3d 307 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 2010)
People v. Hoffler
74 A.D.3d 1632 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 A.D.3d 713, 886 N.Y.S.2d 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-smiley-nyappdiv-2009.