People v. Amanze

• Decision Date: 27 September 2011
• Citation: 2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 06853,87 A.D.3d 1159,929 N.Y.S.2d 876
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,v.Antoine AMANZE, also known as Amanze Antoine, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

87 A.D.3d 1159

929 N.Y.S.2d 876

2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 06853

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Antoine AMANZE, also known as Amanze Antoine, appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Sept. 27, 2011.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREAntoine Amanze, also known as Amanze Antoine, Ossining, N.Y., appellant pro se.Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Laurie Sapakoff, Lois Cullen Valerio, and Richard Longworth Hecht of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), rendered February 24, 2010, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

“A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the County Court” ( People v. McGhee, 62 A.D.3d 1027, 1027, 878 N.Y.S.2d 911; see People v. Seeber, 4 N.Y.3d 780, 793 N.Y.S.2d 826, 826 N.E.2d 797; People v. Pooler, 58 A.D.3d 757, 757, 871 N.Y.S.2d 707; People v. Drago, 50 A.D.3d 920, 920, 855 N.Y.S.2d 252; People v. Mann, 32 A.D.3d 865, 821 N.Y.S.2d 616; People v. Kucharczyk, 15 A.D.3d 595, 790 N.Y.S.2d 522). The County Court's “determination generally will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion” ( People v. McGhee, 62 A.D.3d at 1027, 878 N.Y.S.2d 911; see People v. Pooler, 58 A.D.3d at 757, 871 N.Y.S.2d 707; People v. DeLeon, 40 A.D.3d 1008, 837 N.Y.S.2d 189). A number of the defendant's contentions in connection with his claim that his plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, or intelligently made are based on matter dehors the record and, thus, cannot be reviewed on direct appeal ( see People v. Vasquez, 40 A.D.3d 1134, 1135, 837 N.Y.S.2d 693). To the extent that the defendant's claim can be reviewed, the record establishes that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered his negotiated plea of guilty ( see generally People v. Catu, 4 N.Y.3d 242, 244–245, 792 N.Y.S.2d 887, 825 N.E.2d 1081; People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 16–17, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170; People v. Rhodes, 62 A.D.3d 815, 816, 878 N.Y.S.2d 773). Accordingly, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty.

The defendant's claim that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, which allegedly rendered his plea involuntary, is also based principally on matter dehors the record, which cannot be reviewed on direct appeal ( see People v. Kent, 79 A.D.3d 52, 72, 910 N.Y.S.2d 78, lv. granted 17 N.Y.3d 797, 929 N.Y.S.2d 105, 952 N.E.2d 1100; People v. Bermejo, 77 A.D.3d 965, 966, 909 N.Y.S.2d 398; People v. Tillman, 74 A.D.3d 1251, 1251, 902 N.Y.S.2d 416; People v. Surin, 70 A.D.3d 731, 732, 892 N.Y.S.2d 864). To the extent that the defendant's claim can be reviewed, the defendant's attorney assisted him in obtaining a favorable plea agreement, and there is nothing in the record which casts doubt on counsel's effectiveness ( see People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 633 N.Y.S.2d 270, 657 N.E.2d 265 ; People v. Jackson, 56 A.D.3d 492, 493, 867 N.Y.S.2d 144; People v. Charpentier, 44 A.D.3d 680, 681, 843 N.Y.S.2d 380; People v. Brooks, 36 A.D.3d 929, 930, 828 N.Y.S.2d 553; People v. Grimes, 35 A.D.3d 882, 883, 827...