People v. Griffin
Decision Date | 30 April 2010 |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Davon M. GRIFFIN, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
72 A.D.3d 1496
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Davon M. GRIFFIN, Defendant-Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
April 30, 2010.
Christine M. Cook, Syracuse, for Defendant-Appellant.
William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (Victoria M. White of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, CARNI, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1] ). On a prior appeal defendant challenged, inter alia, the voluntariness of both his waiver of the right to appeal and his plea, and we affirmed the judgment of conviction ( People v. Griffin, 24 A.D.3d 1316, 805 N.Y.S.2d 868, lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 813, 812 N.Y.S.2d 453, 845 N.E.2d 1284). We thereafter denied defendant's motion to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10, but we granted his subsequent motion for a writ of error coram nobis ( People v. Griffin, 59 A.D.3d 1106, 872 N.Y.S.2d 302). We agreed with defendant that he may have been denied effective assistance of appellate counsel by reason of defense counsel's failure to challenge County Court's failure to comply with the statutory mandates of CPL 400.21 ( see generally People v. Borrell, 12 N.Y.3d 365, 369-370, 881 N.Y.S.2d 637, 909 N.E.2d 559), and we therefore vacated our prior order affirming the judgment of conviction and determined that we would "consider the appeal de novo" ( Griffin, 59 A.D.3d at 1106, 872 N.Y.S.2d 302).
On this de novo appeal, we once again reject the challenge by defendant to the voluntariness of his waiver of the right to appeal ( see Griffin, 24 A.D.3d 1316, 805 N.Y.S.2d 868). Defendant further contends that his guilty plea was not voluntary, knowing or intelligent based on the court's alleged failure to address either his complaints concerning assigned counsel or his postplea statement that he "[didn't] even want this plea now." Although that contention is preserved for our review because it was raised in defendant's CPL 440.10 motion ( see generally People v. Bevins, 27 A.D.3d 572, 572-573, 811 N.Y.S.2d 429; People v. Ballinger, 24 A.D.3d 792, 807 N.Y.S.2d 136; People v. Kemp, 10 A.D.3d 811, 781 N.Y.S.2d 919, lv. denied 4 N.Y.3d 765, 792 N.Y.S.2d 8, 825 N.E.2d 140; People v. Martin, 7 A.D.3d 640, 641, 776 N.Y.S.2d 499, lv. denied 3 N.Y.3d 677,...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Rios v. Lempke
-
People v. Rios
...608, cert. denied 498 U.S. 833, 111 S.Ct. 99, 112 L.Ed.2d 70; People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380).899 N.Y.S.2d 771 Defendant further contends in each appeal that the court erred in consolidating the indictments for trial because he made the requisite s......
-
Hudson v. State
...266 [1985], revg. on dissenting mem. of Boomer, J., 105 A.D.2d 1107, 1107–1109, 482 N.Y.S.2d 197 [4th Dept. 1984]; see People v. Griffin, 72 A.D.3d 1496, 899 N.Y.S.2d 771 [4th Dept. 2010]; People v. Alcequier, 43 A.D.3d 699, 841 N.Y.S.2d 550 [1st Dept. 2007], lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 921, 874 N......
-
People v. Halsey
...CPL 400.21 and, if appropriate, the court was then required to sentence defendant as a second felony offender” ( People v. Griffin, 72 A.D.3d 1496, 1497, 899 N.Y.S.2d 771;see People v. Scarbrough, 66 N.Y.2d 673, 674, 496 N.Y.S.2d 409, 487 N.E.2d 266,revg.105 A.D.2d 1107, 482 N.Y.S.2d 197on ......