From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. De La Cruz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 6, 1995
216 A.D.2d 30 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 6, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.).


The inquiry conducted by the court prior to sentencing was adequate to ensure that defendant's unequivocal decision to withdraw his motion to withdraw his plea was, like the plea itself, knowing and voluntary. This is not "that rare case * * * [where] the trial court has a duty to inquire further" ( People v Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666). And in view of the very favorable plea bargain negotiated by defendant's attorney, we find no merit to defendant's claim that the withdrawal of his motion to withdraw his plea, as well as the withdrawal of his motions to suppress and for severance before they were decided on the merits, constituted ineffectiveness of counsel ( see, People v Hayes, 194 A.D.2d 998). We note that most of defendant's allegations in the latter regard are based on matters that might have been more thoroughly developed had an appropriate post-judgment motion been made pursuant to CPL 440.10 ( see, People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998).

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


Summaries of

People v. De La Cruz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 6, 1995
216 A.D.2d 30 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. De La Cruz

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. BARTOLO DE LA CRUZ…

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

Date published: Jun 6, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 30 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
628 N.Y.S.2d 63