People v. Swinson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Swinson

240 A.D.2d 299, 659 N.Y.S.2d 747, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6669

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 19, 1997·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), rendered July 25, 1995, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea was properly denied. Defendant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his specific assertions by means of written application and the court considered the motion extensively prior to sentencing (People v Woodard, 208 AD2d 411, lv denied 84 NY2d 1040). The minutes of the plea proceeding established that a favorable plea was entered knowingly and voluntarily, after a thorough allocution, belying defendant’s unsupported claims that his plea was involuntary and coerced by his attorney (see, People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536; People v Jackson, 186 AD2d 389, lv denied 81 NY2d 790).

We have considered defendant’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Williams and Colabella, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), rendered July 25, 1995, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea was properly denied. Defendant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his specific assertions by means of written application and the court considered the motion extensively prior to sentencing (People v Woodard, 208 AD2d 411, lv denied 84 NY2d 1040). The minutes of the plea proceeding established that a favorable plea was entered knowingly and voluntarily, after a thorough allocution, belying defendant’s unsupported claims that his plea was involuntary and coerced by his attorney (see, People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536; People v Jackson, 186 AD2d 389, lv denied 81 NY2d 790).

We have considered defendant’s other claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Williams and Colabella, JJ.

People v. Swinson, 240 A.D.2d 299, 659 N.Y.S.2d 747, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6669 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

240 A.D.2d 299 (People v. Swinson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related