From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Alfieri

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 4, 1994
201 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

February 4, 1994

Appeal from the Livingston County Court, Cicoria, J.

Present — Pine, J.P., Balio, Fallon, Doerr and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion of defendant to withdraw his guilty plea. Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes that defendant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to present the grounds for his withdrawal application and no evidentiary hearing was required (see, People v Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520, 525; People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927; People v. McNair [appeal No. 1], 186 A.D.2d 1089, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 1028; People v. Croskery, 139 A.D.2d 970, 971). Additionally, the record establishes that defendant was not deprived of his fundamental right to be present at all material stages of the proceedings when he was excluded from a side-bar conference at which the court and counsel discussed the procedure that the court would follow when it considered the motion of defendant to withdraw his guilty plea (see generally, People v Antommarchi, 80 N.Y.2d 247, rearg denied 81 N.Y.2d 759; People v Dokes, 79 N.Y.2d 656, 660). The side-bar conference did not involve "factual matters about which defendant might have peculiar knowledge that would be useful in advancing the defendant's or countering the People's position" (People v Dokes, supra, at 660).

Defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel. Contrary to defendant's argument, the record demonstrates that defense counsel forcefully articulated the grounds for defendant's motion seeking leave to withdraw defendant's guilty plea (see, People v. Glasper, 151 A.D.2d 692, 693).

The record shows that defendant was advised of his rights and that his Alford plea (see, North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25) was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered with a full understanding of its consequences (see, People v. Friedman, 39 N.Y.2d 463, 466; People v. Spencer [appeal No. 1], 185 A.D.2d 695, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 977; People v. Parish, 182 A.D.2d 1104, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 836). Finally, the prosecutor placed on the record the proof that the People intended to offer at trial and that elaboration contained strong evidence of defendant's guilt (see, North Carolina v. Alford, supra, at 37; People v. Friedman, supra, at 466; People v. Spencer, supra).


Summaries of

People v. Alfieri

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 4, 1994
201 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Alfieri

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ERIC J. ALFIERI…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Feb 4, 1994

Citations

201 A.D.2d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
610 N.Y.S.2d 904

Citing Cases

People v. Clacks

To the extent that defendant contends that his plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently…

State of New York v. Christina M. Sanford

Memorandum: Court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motion of defendant to withdraw her guilty…