People v. Zaia

181 A.D.2d 931, 582 N.Y.S.2d 212, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5008
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 30, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 181 A.D.2d 931 (People v. Zaia) 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. Zaia, 181 A.D.2d 931, 582 N.Y.S.2d 212, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5008 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Boklan, J.), rendered March 21, 1990, convicting her of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to withdraw her guilty plea (see, People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520; People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926; People v James, 159 AD2d 723, 724; People v Brownlee, 158 AD2d 610). The defendant’s belated claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is flatly refuted by the record of the plea proceeding in which she knowingly and voluntarily made a complete and detailed plea [932]*932allocution in the presence of competent counsel — with whom the defendant had expressed satisfaction at the time of the plea — after the court had fully apprised the defendant of the consequences of her plea (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9; People v Williams, 178 AD2d 570; People v White, 165 AD2d 820, 821; People v James, supra; People v Brownlee, supra). The record further shows that the defendant was afforded an ample opportunity at sentencing to advance her claim and fully availed herself, through counsel, of that opportunity, by delivering lengthy and detailed arguments in support of the motion (see, People v Frederick, supra, at 525; People v Williams, supra; People v White, supra, at 821; People v James, supra, at 725; People v Hughes, 156 AD2d 130). Thus, under the circumstances, no further inquiry was necessary. Harwood, J. P., Eiber, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Maye
64 A.D.3d 617 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People v. Jefferson
264 A.D.2d 486 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
People v. Harris
222 A.D.2d 522 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Suggs
220 A.D.2d 630 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Richardson
214 A.D.2d 624 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
People v. Hall
195 A.D.2d 521 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Smith
192 A.D.2d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 A.D.2d 931, 582 N.Y.S.2d 212, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-zaia-nyappdiv-1992.