People v. Brown

• Decision Date: 21 May 2014
• Citation: 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 03696,985 N.Y.S.2d 892,117 A.D.3d 962
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Dwight BROWN, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

117 A.D.3d 962

985 N.Y.S.2d 892

2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 03696

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Dwight BROWN, appellant.

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

May 21, 2014.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Grazia DiVincenzo of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J.), rendered July 26, 2011, convicting him of attempted assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the County Court improperly denied his request for substitution of new assigned counsel at sentencing without making sufficient inquiry to determine the validity of his claim. The court furnished the defendant with an ample opportunity to state the basis for his complaint against his attorney. However, the defendant failed to offer more than vague and conclusory assertions of deceit. As such, the court was not obligated to inquire further ( see People v. Porto, 16 N.Y.3d 93, 100, 917 N.Y.S.2d 74, 942 N.E.2d 283;People v. Woods, 110 A.D.3d 748, 972 N.Y.S.2d 97;People v. Stevenson, 36 A.D.3d 634, 635, 831 N.Y.S.2d 74). Under the circumstances of this case, the court providently exercised its discretion in denying the request ( see People v. Porto, 16 N.Y.3d at 101–102, 917 N.Y.S.2d 74, 942 N.E.2d 283;People v. Salgado, 111 A.D.3d 859, 860, 975 N.Y.S.2d 172;People v. Harris, 251 A.D.2d 79, 80, 674 N.Y.S.2d 25).

By pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited appellate review of his claims, asserted in his pro se supplemental brief, of prosecutorial misconduct (see People v. Hansen, 95 N.Y.2d 227, 232, 715 N.Y.S.2d 369, 738 N.E.2d 773;People v. Di Raffaele, 55 N.Y.2d 234, 240, 448 N.Y.S.2d 448, 433 N.E.2d 513) and ineffective assistance of counsel that does not directly involve the plea negotiation and sentence (see People v. Petgen, 55 N.Y.2d 529, 535, n. 3, 450 N.Y.S.2d 299, 435 N.E.2d 669;People v. Tarrant, 114 A.D.3d 710, 710–711, 979 N.Y.S.2d 827;People v. Dunne, 106 A.D.3d 928, 964 N.Y.S.2d 663). Moreover, the defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal further precludes appellate review of his contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel unrelated to the voluntariness of his plea (see People v. Gomez, 114...