From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 8, 1998
252 A.D.2d 984 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

July 8, 1998

Appeal from Judgment of Wayne County Court, Kehoe, J. — Sexual Abuse, 1st Degree.

Present — Green, J.P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The conclusory allegation of defendant that, his counsel had pressured him to plead guilty is insufficient to require vacatur of the plea ( see, People v. Jackson, 171 A.D.2d 883, 884, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 967; People v. Seger, 171 A.D.2d 892, lv dismissed 78 N.Y.2d 1081; People v. Washington, 156 A.D.2d 496, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 925; People v. Brown, 142 A.D.2d 683; People v. Matta, 103 A.D.2d 756, lv denied 63 N.Y.2d 777). In any event, that allegation is belied by the unequivocal statement of defendant during the plea allocution that he had not been threatened, forced or coerced in any way into pleading guilty ( see, People v. Samuel, 208 A.D.2d 776, 777, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 1038; People v. Jackson, 203 A.D.2d 302, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 827).

Defendant's remaining contention has not been preserved for our review ( see, CPL 470.05), and, in any event, it is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 8, 1998
252 A.D.2d 984 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT MILLER…

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

Date published: Jul 8, 1998

Citations

252 A.D.2d 984 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
676 N.Y.S.2d 382

Citing Cases

People v. Rikard

Memorandum: Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his…

People v. Camacho

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.…