Opinion
KA 02-02275.
Decided June 14, 2004.
Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Sara S. Sperrazza, J.), rendered September 16, 2002. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the third degree.
MICHAEL J. VIOLANTE, PUBLIC DEFENDER, LOCKPORT (JOSEPH G. FRAZIER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
MATTHEW J. MURPHY, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (THOMAS H. BRANDT OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
Before: PRESENT: HURLBUTT, J.P., SCUDDER, GORSKI, MARTOCHE, AND HAYES, 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 attempted robbery in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.05). County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the pro se motion of defendant to withdraw his guilty plea based on his generalized assertion of innocence that is unsupported by the record ( see People v. May, 305 A.D.2d 1095, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 622). The record establishes that defendant's guilty plea was voluntarily entered with the advice of counsel "following an appraisal of all the relevant factors" ( People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 57; see May, 305 A.D.2d 1095). The knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his further contention concerning the severity of the sentence ( see May, 305 A.D.2d 1095; People v. Burse, 295 A.D.2d 968, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 709). In any event, the bargained-for sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.