From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. McMahon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 23, 1990
163 A.D.2d 588 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 23, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, we find that the factual admissions which he made during the plea allocution were sufficient to establish the elements of the crime (see, People v Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662). Furthermore, the court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea. Such a decision rests within the sound discretion of the sentencing court (see, People v. Brown, 142 A.D.2d 683). The plea allocution reveals that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty and expressed satisfaction with the representation provided by his attorney (see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9). The evidence elicited at the hearing on the defendant's motion failed to support his claim that he was coerced into pleading guilty. Thompson, J.P., Brown, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. McMahon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 23, 1990
163 A.D.2d 588 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. McMahon

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL McMAHON…

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

Date published: Jul 23, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 588 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
559 N.Y.S.2d 675

Citing Cases

People v. Willingham

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in…

People v. Sanchez

The decision of whether to permit the withdrawal of a plea rests with the sound discretion of the court of…