From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Feliciano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 19, 2005
21 A.D.3d 1036 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2003-09924.

September 19, 2005.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.), rendered October 16, 2003, as amended October 29, 2003, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, burglary in the first degree, burglary in the second degree, robbery in the second degree, and assault in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Laura R. Johnson, New York, N.Y. (Sheilah Fernandez of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Salvador Arcadipane of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Fisher, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the plea of guilty is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

It is clear from the face of the record that the defendant's plea of guilty was induced by a promise from the Supreme Court that could not be fulfilled ( see People v. Mills, 1 NY3d 269). Thus, on the particular facts presented, vacatur of the plea is appropriate ( see People v. Selikoff, 35 NY2d 227, cert denied 419 US 1122; People v. McCready, 296 AD2d 423).


Summaries of

People v. Feliciano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 19, 2005
21 A.D.3d 1036 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

People v. Feliciano

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EDWIN FELICIANO…

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

Date published: Sep 19, 2005

Citations

21 A.D.3d 1036 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 6811
801 N.Y.S.2d 824

Citing Cases

People v. Wiedmer

Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's pro se application to…