From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rhodes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 25, 1998
251 A.D.2d 906 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 25, 1998

Appeal from the County Court of Columbia County (Czajka, J.).


Upon defendant's plea of guilty to the crime of burglary in the third degree, the District Attorney and defense counsel jointly recommended a one-year jail term, to which County Court did not agree to be bound. Defendant also waived his right to appeal. On the day of sentencing, the People filed a statement alleging that defendant was the subject of a prior felony conviction. The People requested, in a motion joined by defense counsel, that defendant be sentenced to a term of 2 to 4 years' incarceration. County Court sentenced defendant as a second felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 3 1/2 to 7 years. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Initially, we note that defendant's right to challenge the voluntariness of his plea based on the competency of his legal representation is not foreclosed despite his failure to move to withdraw the plea and his waiver of the right to appeal ( see, People v. Conyers, 227 A.D.2d 793, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 982). We find, however, nothing in the record to support defendant's claim that his plea was rendered involuntary by defense counsel's conduct. Since the underlying complaint charged burglary in the second degree, defense counsel clearly negotiated an advantageous plea and, as a result, defendant was provided meaningful representation ( see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146-147).

Moreover, we find defendant's contention, that defense counsel's failure to move to withdraw the plea is additional proof of his ineffectiveness, to be without merit. The transcript of the plea allocution demonstrates that County Court "made it clear that it was not a party to any sentencing agreement" ( People v. Hartford, 217 A.D.2d 798, 800). County Court told defendant that he would be subject to a prison term of up to seven years and that, although defense counsel and the District Attorney were jointly recommending a one-year jail sentence, County Court was not promising that he would not be given a prison term. Since County Court did not make a commitment regarding sentencing at the time the plea was entered, it was under no obligation to give defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea before imposing a more severe sentence than that which the People promised to recommend ( see, id., at 800). Accordingly, defense counsel's failure to move to withdraw the plea did not prejudice defendant and, as a result, it cannot be said that defendant's assistance was meaningless ( see, People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 405).

Finally, County Court gave defendant every opportunity to controvert the prior felony conviction ( cf., People v. Bryant, 180 A.D.2d 874, 876) and, therefore, we find no reason to disturb the judgment on that basis.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Rhodes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 25, 1998
251 A.D.2d 906 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Rhodes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WALTER B. RHODES, SR.…

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

Date published: Jun 25, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 906 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
674 N.Y.S.2d 865

Citing Cases

People v. Wood

Before defendant pleaded guilty, however, the court clarified its position and advised defendant that it…

People v. Gero

The record demonstrates that, prior to accepting defendant's plea, County Court clearly indicated to…