From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ortiz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 9, 1995
221 A.D.2d 176 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 9, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Vincent Quattrochi, J.).


We find that the court did not abuse its discretion in summarily denying defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea where defendant made bare claims of confusion and insufficient information (CPL 220.60). Defendant knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty ( see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9), and the court gave defendant ample opportunity to advance his claim ( People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927).

Defense counsel's representation of defendant at the motion to withdraw the plea was not ineffective, given the motion's lack of merit, and there was no need to appoint new counsel.

Defendant's attorney was under no obligation to amplify defendant's unsupported assertion ( People v Rodriguez, 181 A.D.2d 643, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 909; People v Burgos, 177 A.D.2d 587, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 944), and the court's commendation of defense counsel, made after denying the application, did not transform counsel into defendant's adversary.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Rubin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Ortiz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 9, 1995
221 A.D.2d 176 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Ortiz

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANGEL ORTIZ, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 9, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 176 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
633 N.Y.S.2d 949

Citing Cases

People v. Simpson

Since defendant violated every term of his plea agreement, the court properly imposed an enhanced sentence (…

People v. Reyes

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.). Defendant's request for new assigned…