Opinion
February 11, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Goldstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. We disagree. It is well settled that the decision as to whether to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously entered plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the court (see, People v Hagzan, 155 A.D.2d 616; People v Gomez, 142 A.D.2d 649). The defendant alleged, in his pro se motion to withdraw his plea, that he was coerced by his prior counsel into accepting the plea offer of 15 years to life imprisonment and was misled by counsel's statement that he would be eligible for work release after nine years. The court held a hearing at which both the defendant and his prior counsel testified. The court credited the testimony of counsel and discredited that of the defendant. It is settled that issues of credibility are primarily for the hearing court and its findings should be upheld unless they are clearly erroneous (see, People v Armstead, 98 A.D.2d 726).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit. Mangano, P.J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.