From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Dengel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 2002
299 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

KA 01-02348

November 15, 2002.

Appeal from a judgment of Allegany County Court (Euken, J.), entered October 26, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree.

BONNIE BURGIO, WATERTOWN, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TERRENCE M. PARKER, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BELMONT, FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., PINE, WISNER, KEHOE, AND GORSKI, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court properly denied his motion to suppress his statements to the State Police. The record supports the court's determination that defendant was not subjected to custodial interrogation before Miranda warnings were given ( see People v. Bray, 295 A.D.2d 996, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 694; People v. Ludlow, 187 A.D.2d 936, 937, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 888) . Defendant's further contention that the evidence before the grand jury was not legally sufficient is not properly before us inasmuch as "defendant accepted a bargained plea to a lesser included offense" ( People v. Welsher, 270 A.D.2d 839, 839, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 806).

Defendant also contends that the court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his plea without conducting a hearing. We disagree. "It is well settled that the decision to permit the withdrawal of a plea of guilty is directed to the sound discretion of the court * * *. The court properly exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his [guilty plea] without a hearing, after assigning him new counsel and giving him a full opportunity to present his contentions" ( People v. Polite, 259 A.D.2d 566, 567, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 1025; see People v. Feliciano, 242 A.D.2d 787). The additional contention of defendant that "he was coerced by his attorney is belied by his statement during the plea allocution that he had not been forced into pleading guilty" ( Polite, 259 A.D.2d at 567; see People v. Cole, 295 A.D.2d 360). The record establishes that "defendant entered a knowing and voluntary plea and there is nothing in the record to suggest that the plea was improvident or baseless" ( People v. Weekes, 289 A.D.2d 599, 599, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 682).


Summaries of

People v. Dengel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 2002
299 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Dengel

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JOSEPH C…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 2002

Citations

299 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
750 N.Y.S.2d 553

Citing Cases

People v. Heer

Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his pro se…