From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Akridge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 29, 1998
253 A.D.2d 727 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

September 29, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey Atlas, J.).


Defendant's claim that his plea was coerced by the court's discussion of potential sentences is not preserved as a matter of law since defendant did not move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction ( People v. Ramirez, 196 A.D.2d 775, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 852), and we decline to review this claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that it was not coercive for the court to inform defendant that he faced consecutive sentences if he went to trial on two separate indictments ( compare, People v. Green, 240 A.D.2d 513, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 940, with People v. Sung Min, 249 A.D.2d 130).

The record establishes that defendant received meaningful representation on both indictments ( see, People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404), notwithstanding the fact that counsel was not formally appointed as to one of the indictments until after the plea was taken.

Concur — Sullivan, J P., Nardelli, Rubin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Akridge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 29, 1998
253 A.D.2d 727 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Akridge

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROCKY AKRIDGE…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 727 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
678 N.Y.S.2d 258

Citing Cases

People v. Josephs

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's arguments, to the extent that they are preserved for…

People v. Butler

Memorandum: By failing to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant has…