Opinion
April 28, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Altman, J.).
The sentencing court properly exercised its discretion (CPL 220.60) in denying defendant's application to withdraw his guilty plea based upon his claimed misunderstanding as to the imposition of consecutive, rather than concurrent, sentences. The record reveals that this element of the sentence was clearly explained by the court and discussed at length between defendant and his counsel (see, People v Richards, 165 A.D.2d 700, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 990; People v Braun, 167 A.D.2d 164, 165) and that defendant had ample opportunity to consider the matter, and that the plea was otherwise knowing and voluntary (see, People v Curet, 176 A.D.2d 160, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 1127, citing People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9).
We have considered defendant's other arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ross, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.