People v. Hosgor

Dec 12, 2005
Reporters:
,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant‘s plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 17 [1983]). To the extent that the defendant‘s statements at sentencing may be deemed to constitute a pro se motion to vacate his plea of guilty, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that motion without directing a hearing or assigning new counsel (see People v Reynolds, 4 AD3d 490 [2004]; People v Anderson, 284 AD2d 544, 545 [2001]). The defendant‘s challenge to the voluntariness of the plea is based on matter which is dehors the record (see People v Bruno, 269 AD2d 540 [2000]).

H. Miller, J.P., Crane, Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.