People v. Maldonado

Nov 2, 2016
2012-00178
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Dillon

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel (see Jones v Barnes, 463 US 745 [1983]; People v Stultz, 2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Eng, P.J., Mastro, Rivera and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant‘s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty (see People v Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 780 [2005]; People v McVay, 140 AD3d 1090, 1090 [2016]; People v Dazzo, 92 AD3d 796, 796 [2012]). “When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry rest[s] largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the motion is made and a hearing will be granted only in rare instances” (People v Brown, 14 NY3d 113, 116 [2010], quoting People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926, 927 [1974]; see People v McVay, 140 AD3d at 1090).

Here, the record supports the Supreme Court‘s determination that the defendant‘s plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]; People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 16-17 [1983]; People v McVay, 140 AD3d at 1090; People v Dazzo, 92 AD3d at 796). The defendant‘s post-plea assertions regarding his innocence contradicted the admissions made under oath at his plea allocution and did not call into question the voluntariness of the plea (see People v Martinez, 129 AD3d 1106, 1107 [2015]; People v Pollidore, 123 AD3d 1058, 1059 [2014]; People v Appling, 94 AD3d 1135, 1136 [2012]). These statements were insufficient to warrant vacatur of his plea or obligate the court to conduct any further inquiry (see CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Upson, 134 AD3d 1058, 1058-1059 [2015]; People v Dazzo, 92 AD3d at 796-797).

The defendant‘s contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]; People v McVay, 140 AD3d at 1090; People v McGuire, 122 AD3d 947, 948 [2014]). The record as a whole demonstrates that he received effective assistance of counsel under both the federal and state constitutional standards (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668, 688 [1984]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d at 712; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]) Dillon, J.P., Roman, Hinds-Radix and Duffy, JJ., concur.