From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Robideau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 15, 1987
133 A.D.2d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

October 15, 1987

Appeal from the County Court of Albany County (Turner, Jr., J.).


Pursuant to a negotiated plea bargain resulting in a reduced charge, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of burglary in the third degree and waived his right to appeal. He received a sentence of 1 1/2 to 4 1/2 years' imprisonment. On this appeal, defendant maintains that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, that the plea allocution was insufficient, and that the sentence was harsh and excessive.

Initially, we observe that defendant waived his right to appeal from the sentence (see, People v. Mayes, 133 A.D.2d 905 [decided herewith]; People v. Harvey, 124 A.D.2d 943, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 746). Moreover, since defendant neither moved to withdraw his plea nor to vacate his conviction, he has failed to preserve for appeal any question bearing on the sufficiency of the plea allocution (see, People v. Martinez, 125 A.D.2d 829). In any event, our review of the record confirms that the plea was knowingly and intelligently made with the advice of counsel and not improvident under the circumstances (see, People v Langhorn, 119 A.D.2d 844, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 758; People v Taliaferro, 109 A.D.2d 943, 945; cf., People v. Maye, 129 A.D.2d 204). As we said in People v. Maye (supra), we note our disapproval of County Court's method of conducting the plea allocution and reiterate that it is the function of the court, not the prosecuting attorney, to conduct this inquiry.

Finally, we agree that defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was not waived and is properly before us (cf., People v. Harvey, 124 A.D.2d 943, supra). This contention is grounded on the premise that counsel failed to move for dismissal of the indictment on speedy trial grounds (see, CPL 30.20, 30.30 Crim. Proc.). There is, however, no basis in this record indicating that defendant was entitled to such relief. The record otherwise confirms that defendant was accorded meaningful representation.

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P.J., Main, Weiss, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Robideau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 15, 1987
133 A.D.2d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

People v. Robideau

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. BRIAN P. ROBIDEAU…

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

Date published: Oct 15, 1987

Citations

133 A.D.2d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

People v. Sanchez

That the prosecutor conducted most of the plea allocution did not constitute a "mode of proceedings" error…

People v. Mayes

question of the adequacy of defendant's legal representation, it has recently been observed that when a…