From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Anonymous

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 18, 1994
208 A.D.2d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

October 18, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Juanita Bing Newton, J.).


The debriefing agreement between the parties stated that the People were to be the sole judge of whether defendant's cooperation warranted a reduced sentence. Absent factual support for defendant's claim that he was being truthful in his debriefing sessions with the prosecutors, it cannot be said that the sentencing court abused its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his plea without conducting a hearing on why the prosecutors had concluded otherwise (see, People v. Ortiz, 180 A.D.2d 429; People v. Auslander, 169 A.D.2d 853; People v McGuire, 109 A.D.2d 921, 922).

Concur — Wallach, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Asch and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Anonymous

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 18, 1994
208 A.D.2d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Anonymous

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANONYMOUS, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 18, 1994

Citations

208 A.D.2d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
618 N.Y.S.2d 1009

Citing Cases

People v. Johnson

Before: Williams, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Lerner, Friedman, JJ. The court properly exercised its discretion in…

People v. Anonymous

The People ultimately recommended and defendant received the sentence that was promised at the plea.…