From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 22, 1998
253 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

September 22, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Allen Alpert, J.)


Although defense counsel controverted the claims made in defendant's pro se motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, defendant's right to effective assistance of counsel was not adversely affected since it is clear from the record that the court considered and denied defendant's meritless motion without being influenced by counsel's remarks ( see, People v. Rodriguez, 189 A.D.2d 684, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 892).

The record establishes that defendant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived his right to appeal the sentence imposed and is now foreclosed from arguing that his sentence is excessive ( People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1). In any event, we perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.

Concur — Tom, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Hart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 22, 1998
253 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Hart

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Sep 22, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
677 N.Y.S.2d 467

Citing Cases

People v. Otero

Counsel's comments, at the court's invitation, in defense of his own performance did not create a conflict of…