Opinion
May 4, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.).
The court's summary denial of defendant's motion to vacate his conviction was proper. The voluntariness of the plea was clearly established by the record of the thorough plea allocution. The sentence was adjourned three times at defendant's request to permit him to conclude certain personal affairs. On the fourth appearance, when defendant was denied another adjournment, he first raised the issue of the propriety of the plea. Although defendant then moved to withdraw his guilty plea, he expressly declined to state any reasons for such application at that time. Moreover, the claims of coercion set forth in his CPL 440.10 motion are without foundation. Defendant's claim that the court threatened to impose the maximum sentence upon a conviction after trial is plainly contradicted by the record, and the conduct by counsel that defendant claims to have coerced him into accepting the plea constituted nothing more than counsel's professional opinion on the strength of the People's case and appropriate advice to accept the plea (People v. Spinks, 227 A.D.2d 310, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 995).
Concur — Tom, J. P., Wallach, Lerner and Rubin, JJ.