From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Burwell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 13, 2008
56 A.D.3d 304 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 4553.

November 13, 2008.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered July 13, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent violent felony offender, to a term of 12 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Richard M. Weinstein, New York, for appellant.

Clarence Burwell, appellant pro se.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Jared Wolkowitz of acounsel), for respondent.

Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Nardelli and Buckley, JJ.


The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress identification testimony. The identifying witness led the police into a basement in search of an intruder, and the police arrested defendant in the witness's presence. Even assuming that the witness's viewing of defendant in custody moments later could be considered a showup, this prompt, on-the-scene procedure was entirely permissible ( see e.g. People v Gatling, 38 AD3d 239, lv denied 9 NY3d 865; People v Boutte, 304 AD2d 307, lv denied 100 NY2d 579).

After sufficient inquiry, the court properly denied defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea ( see People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520). The record establishes the voluntariness of the plea. Defendant's disappointment in his attorney's inability to negotiate a more favorable disposition was not a basis for withdrawing the plea; moreover, we note that defendant received the most lenient sentence available for one in his situation ( see Penal Law § 70.08 [c]).

Defendant's pro se ineffective assistance of counsel claims are unreviewable on direct appeal because they primarily involve matters outside the record ( see People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709; People v Love, 57 NY2d 998). On the existing record, to the extent it permits review, we find that defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards ( see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714; People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404; see also Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668).


Summaries of

People v. Burwell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 13, 2008
56 A.D.3d 304 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

People v. Burwell

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CLARENCE BURWELL…

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

Date published: Nov 13, 2008

Citations

56 A.D.3d 304 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 8547
868 N.Y.S.2d 614

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

For the instant offenses, the defendant was sentenced, in accordance with the People's original…