People v. Chaney

• Decision Date: 08 April 2010
• Citation: 72 A.D.3d 1194,900 N.Y.S.2d 163
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Raquan R. CHANEY, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

900 N.Y.S.2d 163

72 A.D.3d 1194

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,

v.Raquan R. CHANEY, Appellant.

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

April 8, 2010.

Kathryn S. Dell, Troy, for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Kenneth C. Weafer of counsel), for respondent.

Before: SPAIN, J.P., ROSE, KAVANAGH, STEIN and EGAN JR., JJ.

KAVANAGH, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.), rendered December 19, 2007, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

Defendant was charged in a four-count indictment with two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, attempted assault in the first degree and criminal use of a firearm in the second degree.¹ As pretrial hearings were aboutto begin, defendant agreed to enter a guilty plea to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and waive his rightto appeal his sentence in exchange for a commitment by County Court that his sentence not exceed nine years in prison plus three years of postrelease supervision. One month later, when defendant appeared for sentencing, he made an oral application to withdraw his guilty plea claiming that his assigned counsel had misinformed him regarding the length of the sentence that could have been imposed if he had rejected the plea and had been convicted of all of the crimes listed in the indictment. He also maintained that it was his understanding when he entered his guilty plea that County Court had agreed to impose a 3 1/2-year prison term as his sentence. Given the nature of these claims, County Court adjourned sentencing and new counsel was assigned to represent defendant, who submitted a written motion on defendant's behalf to withdraw the guilty plea. County Court denied defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea and sentenced defendant to a prison term of eight years, plus three years of postrelease supervision.

Defendant argues on this appeal that trial counsel did not provide him with meaningful representation and specifically claims that counsel failed to adequately explain the legal options presented by the plea offers made to him during the course of his prosecution. These claims are not supported by the record. " 'In the context of a guilty plea, a defendant has been afforded meaningful representation when he or she receives an advantageous plea and nothing in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel' " ( People v. Singletary, 51 A.D.3d 1334, 1335, 858 N.Y.S.2d 483 [2008], lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 741, 864 N.Y.S.2d 400, 894 N.E.2d 664 [2008], quoting People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404, 633 N.Y.S.2d 270, 657 N.E.2d 265 [1995]; see People v. Carmona, 66 A.D.3d 1240, 1242, 887 N.Y.S.2d 370 [2009]; People v. Lee, 51 A.D.3d 1217, 1217-1218, 857 N.Y.S.2d 366 [2008] ). Initially, we note that defendant's contentions regarding his trial counsel involve matters that, for the most part, are outside the record and, as such, are not a proper subject for our review ( see People v. Brown, 68 A.D.3d 1150, 1151, 890 N.Y.S.2d 164 [2009]; People v. Fiske, 68 A.D.3d 1149, 1150, 889 N.Y.S.2d 746 [2009] ).

Moreover, it is undisputed that defendant's guilty plea served to significantly reduce the potential prison sentence that he could have received had he gone to trial and been convicted of all of the charges contained in the indictment. In addition, counsel made appropriate pretrial motions on defendant's behalf and was about to represent his interests at a Wade/ Huntley hearing when defendant entered his guilty plea. Also, we note that defendant had previously rejected a plea offer...