People v. Tobar
This text of 92 A.D.3d 906 (People v. Tobar) 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.
Opinion
[907]*907Contrary to the defendant’s contention, his plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]; People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909, 910-911 [1990]; People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 16 [1983]; People v Nixon, 21 NY2d 338 [1967], cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York, 393 US 1067 [1969]). The Supreme Court properly conducted the plea allocution (see People v Nixon, 21 NY2d at 353).
The defendant was provided with the effective assistance of counsel (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]). The defendant’s unsubstantiated claims of coercion and dissatisfaction with the representation by his counsel, which were refuted by his statements during the plea allocution, do not warrant a hearing (see generally People v Massey, 70 AD3d 722 [2010]; People v Hughes, 62 AD3d 1026 [2009]). Rivera, J.E, Angiolillo, Leventhal and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
92 A.D.3d 906, 938 N.Y.2d 819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tobar-nyappdiv-2012.