From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Marks

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Nov 20, 2018
166 A.D.3d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

7678– 7678A Ind. 5817/12 1372/14

11-20-2018

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Emanuel MARKS, Defendant–Appellant.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Brittany N. Francis of counsel), for appellant. Emanuel Marks, appellant pro se. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Frank Glaser of counsel), for respondent.


Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Brittany N. Francis of counsel), for appellant.

Emanuel Marks, appellant pro se.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Frank Glaser of counsel), for respondent.

Sweeny, J.P., Gische, Kapnick, Gesmer, Moulton, JJ.

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy L. Kahn, J.), rendered December 3, 2015, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of identity theft in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of two to four years, unanimously affirmed.

The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. "When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry rest largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the motion is made and a hearing will be granted only in rare instances" ( People v. Brown, 14 N.Y.3d 113, 116, 897 N.Y.S.2d 674, 924 N.E.2d 782 [2010] [internal quotation marks omitted] ). The plea minutes demonstrate that defendant voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently pleaded guilty in exchange for a favorable sentence (see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646 [1993] ). The court had sufficient information to determine that defendant's claim that his prior counsel's alleged ineffectiveness caused him to involuntarily plead guilty was without merit and did not warrant a hearing.

Defendant's excessive sentence argument is moot because he has completed his entire sentence.

We have considered and rejected defendant's pro se claims.


Summaries of

People v. Marks

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Nov 20, 2018
166 A.D.3d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

People v. Marks

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Emanuel Marks…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 20, 2018

Citations

166 A.D.3d 511 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
166 A.D.3d 511
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 7961

Citing Cases

People v. Marks

Judge: Decision Reported Below: 1st Dept: 166 AD3d 511 (NY)…