People v. Crawford

Decision Date08 May 2013
Citation106 A.D.3d 832,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 03340,964 N.Y.S.2d 636
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Meldon CRAWFORD, appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Frances A. Gallagher of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Diane R. Eisner, and Adam M. Koelsch of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, LEONARD B. AUSTIN, and ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chun, J.), rendered December 4, 2009, convicting him of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

“The decision as to whether to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously entered plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the court and generally will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion” ( People v. Jacob, 94 A.D.3d 1142, 1143, 942 N.Y.S.2d 627;seeCPL 220.60[3]; People v. Alexander, 97 N.Y.2d 482, 483–484, 743 N.Y.S.2d 45, 769 N.E.2d 802). “Generally, a plea of guilty may not be withdrawn absent some evidence of innocence, fraud, or mistake in its inducement” ( People v. Smith, 54 A.D.3d 879, 880, 863 N.Y.S.2d 818;see People v. Jacob, 94 A.D.3d at 1143, 942 N.Y.S.2d 627).

“When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry ‘rest[s] largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the motion is made’ and a hearing will be granted only in rare instances” ( People v. Brown, 14 N.Y.3d 113, 116, 897 N.Y.S.2d 674, 924 N.E.2d 782, quoting People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544;see People v. Smith, 54 A.D.3d at 880, 863 N.Y.S.2d 818). “Where, however, the record raises a legitimate question as to the voluntariness of the plea, an evidentiary hearing is required” ( People v. Brown, 14 N.Y.3d at 116, 897 N.Y.S.2d 674, 924 N.E.2d 782).

Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty without conducting a hearing. The defendant's postplea assertions regarding his innocence and the documents cited in support of his motion were insufficient to warrant withdrawal of his plea or a hearing ( see People v. Friedman, 39 N.Y.2d 463, 467, 384 N.Y.S.2d 408, 348 N.E.2d 883;People v. Douglas, 83 A.D.3d 1092, 1093, 921 N.Y.S.2d 324;People v. Dazzo, 92 A.D.3d 796, 796, 938 N.Y.S.2d 446). Furthermore, the defendant's claim that he was coerced into pleading guilty is belied by his statements under oath acknowledging that he was voluntarily pleading guilty, and that nobody had made any threats or forced him to enter his plea ( see People v. Dazzo, 92 A.D.3d at 796, 938 N.Y.S.2d 446;People v. Douglas, 83 A.D.3d at 1093, 921 N.Y.S.2d 324;see also People v. Kosse, 94 A.D.3d 908, 908, 941 N.Y.S.2d 847).

The defendant's contention that his attorney was ineffective is based, in part, on matter appearing on the record and, in part, on matter outside the record, and thus constitutes a ‘mixed claim[ ] of ineffective assistance ( People v. Maxwell, 89 A.D.3d 1108, 1109, 933 N.Y.S.2d 386, quoting People v. Evans, 16 N.Y.3d 571, 575 n. 2, 925 N.Y.S.2d 366, 949 N.E.2d 457,cert. denied––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 325, 181 L.Ed.2d 201). In this case, it is not evident from the matter appearing on the record that the defendant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel ( cf. People v. Crump, 53 N.Y.2d 824, 440 N.Y.S.2d 170, 422 N.E.2d 815;People v. Brown, 45 N.Y.2d 852, 410 N.Y.S.2d 287, 382 N.E.2d 1149;People v. McClurkin, 96 A.D.3d 784, 785, 945 N.Y.S.2d 718;...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • People v. Bennett
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 26 Marzo 2014
    ...absent an improvident exercise of discretion” ( People v. Howard, 109 A.D.3d 487, 487, 970 N.Y.S.2d 86;see People v. Crawford, 106 A.D.3d 832, 833, 964 N.Y.S.2d 636;People v. Jacob, 94 A.D.3d at 1143, 942 N.Y.S.2d 627;CPL 220.60[3] ). “When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the n......
  • People v. Murphy
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 5 Febrero 2014
    ...797; People v. Edmunson,109 A.D.3d 621, 970 N.Y.S.2d 635; People v. Gordon, 107 A.D.3d 739, 740, 966 N.Y.S.2d 214; People v. Crawford, 106 A.D.3d 832, 833, 964 N.Y.S.2d 636; People v. Anderson, 98 A.D.3d 524, 949 N.Y.S.2d 207). Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in ......
  • People v. Haywood
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 12 Noviembre 2014
    ...; People v. Edmunson, 109 A.D.3d 621, 970 N.Y.S.2d 635 ; People v. Gordon, 107 A.D.3d 739, 740, 966 N.Y.S.2d 214 ; People v. Crawford, 106 A.D.3d 832, 833, 964 N.Y.S.2d 636 ; People v. Anderson, 98 A.D.3d 524, 949 N.Y.S.2d 207 ). Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion i......
  • People v. Rodriguez
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 28 Septiembre 2016
    ...of innocence, fraud, or mistake in its inducement” (People v. Smith, 54 A.D.3d 879, 880, 863 N.Y.S.2d 818 ; see People v. Crawford, 106 A.D.3d 832, 833, 964 N.Y.S.2d 636 ). “When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry ‘rest[s] largely ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT