People v. Boyd
| Decision Date | 29 May 1968 |
| Citation | 22 N.Y.2d 707,238 N.E.2d 923,291 N.Y.S.2d 816 |
| Parties | , 238 N.E.2d 923 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph BOYD, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 28 A.D.2d 823, 282 N.Y.S.2d 429.
Daniel C. Schaffer and Anthony F. Marra, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Frank S. Hogan, New York City (H. Richard Uviller, and John J. Moyna, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
The defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree, assault in the second degree, grand larceny in the second degree, and possessing a dangerous weapon as a felony.
The Supreme Court, New York County, Wilfred A. Waltemade, J., rendered judgment of conviction and sentenced defendant as a second felony offender. Defendant appealed.
The Appellate Division affirmed without opinion. The defendant appealed by permission of an associate judge of the Court of Appeals. In the Court of Appeals he asserted that the trial court should have permitted him to withdraw his plea of guilty, that the trial court should have appointed a lawyer to represent him on his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty and should have held a hearing on that motion, and that the trial court should not have permitted the People to introduce hearsay evidence.
Judgment reversed and the case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for the limited purpose of granting a new hearing of defendant's motion to withdraw his plea so that he might have the assistance of counsel in attempting to show why he should have been allowed to withdraw his plea of guilty to the indictment (People v. Rozzell, 20 N.Y.2d 712, 282 N.Y.S.2d 775, 229 N.E.2d 452; People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, 287 N.Y.S.2d 659, 234 N.E.2d 687).
All concur except SCILEPPI, BERGAN and JASEN, JJ., who dissent and vote to affirm on the ground that the position taken by defense counsel on the application to withdraw he plea did not constitute a deprivation of constitutional rights.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Kennedy
...of counsel and became entitled, at that juncture, to the appointment of new counsel. Our decisions in People v. Boyd, 22 N.Y.2d 707, 291 N.Y.S.2d 816, 238 N.E.2d 923, and People v. Rozzell, 20 N.Y.2d 712, 282 N.Y.S.2d 775, 229 N.E.2d 452, point the conclusion here. When the trial judge aske......
-
People v. Driscoll
...775, 229 N.E.2d 452; People v. Kennedy, 22 N.Y.2d 280, 292 N.Y.S.2d 625, 239 N.E.2d 510, decided June 5, 1968; People v. Boyd, 22 N.Y.2d 707, 291 N.Y.S.2d 816, 238 N.E.2d 923, decided May 29, All concur except TILZER, J., who dissents in the following memorandum: TILZER, Justice (dissenting......
-
People v. McGrath
... ... Rozzell, 20 N.Y.2d 712, 282 N.Y.S.2d 775, 229 N.E.2d 452; People v. Boyd, 22 N.Y.2d 707, 291 N.Y.S.2d 816, ... 238 N.E.2d 923; People v. Kennedy, 22 N.Y.2d 280, 292 N.Y.S.2d 625, 239 N.E.2d 510; People v. Driscoll, [31 A.D.2d 945] 30 A.D.2d 793, 292 N.Y.S.2d 703). While an attorney from the Legal Aid Society conferred with defendant during the course of the hearing, ... ...
-
People v. Mitchell
...has a right to the effective assistance of counsel on his or her motion to withdraw a guilty plea ( see People v. Boyd, 22 N.Y.2d 707, 291 N.Y.S.2d 816, 238 N.E.2d 923 [1968];People v. Rozzell, 20 N.Y.2d 712, 282 N.Y.S.2d 775, 229 N.E.2d 452 [1967] ). The motion court has broad discretion i......