Opinion
2017-04982 Ind. No. 436-16
01-15-2020
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Jonathan BALBUENATORRES, Appellant.
Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, N.Y. (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant. Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Rosalind C. Gray and Thomas Costello of counsel), for respondent.
Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, N.Y. (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant.
Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Rosalind C. Gray and Thomas Costello of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Martin I. Efman, J.), rendered March 16, 2017, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant was charged with two counts of robbery in the second degree with respect to his involvement in the forcible stealing of money from a taxi driver that occurred on February 29, 2016. On December 5, 2016, the defendant pleaded guilty to those charges in exchange for a promised sentence by the County Court. After pleading guilty, but prior to sentencing, the defendant moved to withdraw his plea of guilty. The court denied the motion without a hearing. The defendant appeals, contending that the court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty.
A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and its determination generally will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see CPL 220.60[3] ; People v. Stephensbush, 172 A.D.3d 1108, 100 N.Y.S.3d 322 ; People v. Massey, 70 A.D.3d 722, 892 N.Y.S.2d 888 ; People v. DeLeon, 40 A.D.3d 1008, 837 N.Y.S.2d 189 ). When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry rests largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the motion is made and a hearing will be granted only in rare instances (see People v. Manor, 27 N.Y.3d 1012, 1013–1014, 35 N.Y.S.3d 272, 54 N.E.3d 1143 ; People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544 ). When a motion to withdraw a guilty plea "is patently insufficient on its face, a court may simply deny the motion without making any inquiry" ( People v. Mitchell, 21 N.Y.3d 964, 967, 970 N.Y.S.2d 919, 993 N.E.2d 405 ).
Here, the record supports the County Court's determination that the defendant's plea of guilty was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v. Conceicao, 26 N.Y.3d 375, 23 N.Y.S.3d 124, 44 N.E.3d 199 ; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170 ; People v. Stephensbush, 172 A.D.3d at 1109, 100 N.Y.S.3d 322 ). The defendant's postplea assertions that he was not sufficiently advised by counsel about the consequences of pleading guilty contradicted the statements he made under oath at his plea allocution and were insufficient to warrant vacatur of his plea, a hearing, or further inquiry by the court (see People v. Stephensbush, 172 A.D.3d at 1109, 100 N.Y.S.3d 322 ; People v. Massey, 70 A.D.3d at 722–723, 892 N.Y.S.2d 888 ).
RIVERA, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and DUFFY, JJ., concur.