People v. Hatcher

• Decision Date: 15 December 2022
• Docket Number: s. 112698,113333
• Citation: 2022 NY Slip Op 07099
• Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jayvel Hatcher, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

2022 NY Slip Op 07099

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Jayvel Hatcher, Appellant.

Nos. 112698, 113333

Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

December 15, 2022

Calendar Date November 18, 2022

Angela M. Kelley, Albany, for appellant.

Joseph Stanzione, District Attorney, Catskill (Denise J. Kerrigan of counsel), for respondent.

Before Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Pritzker, Ceresia and Fisher, JJ.

CERESIA, J.

Appeals (1) from a judgment of the County Court of Greene County (Terry J. Wilhelm, J.), rendered September 19, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted assault in the second degree, and (2) by permission, from an order of said court, entered March 16, 2022, which denied defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment of conviction, without a hearing.

Defendant was charged in a sealed indictment with two counts of assault in the second degree and one count of assault in the third degree. The charges stemmed from an incident that occurred in February 2016 when defendant repeatedly struck a correction officer at the facility where he then was incarcerated. In full satisfaction of that indictment, defendant agreed to plead guilty to one count of attempted assault in the second degree with the understanding that he would be sentenced to a prison term of 1½ to 3 years - to be served consecutively to the sentence he then was serving. Following defendant's guilty plea, which did not require him to waive his right to appeal, the matter was adjourned for sentencing.

Prior to sentencing in September 2017, defendant moved to withdraw his plea, contending that defense counsel's failure to provide him with a copy of various discovery materials rendered his plea involuntary. County Court denied defendant's motion and imposed the agreed-upon term of imprisonment. Thereafter, in January 2022, defendant moved pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment of conviction, alleging that he had been denied the effective assistance of counsel. The People opposed the requested relief, and County Court denied defendant's motion without a hearing. Defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction and, by permission, from the order denying his CPL 440.10 motion.

We affirm. Defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his plea was preserved by his unsuccessful motion to withdraw (see People v Rodriguez, 206 A.D.3d 1383, 1384 [3d Dept 2022]), which, in turn, was premised upon defense counsel's failure to provide defendant with copies of the People's response to defendant's discovery demands. ^[1] According to defendant, had he personally received copies of the discovery materials in a timely manner and been able to make his own assessment thereof, as opposed to relying upon defense counsel's evaluation of the evidence, he would not have pleaded guilty. Defendant further contends that County Court abused its discretion in denying his request for an adjournment, as a result of which he felt pressured to accept the guilty plea. We find such claims to be unpersuasive.

As a starting point, although defendant now complains that the 30-minute adjournment granted by County Court was inadequate, defendant raised no objection in this regard after the proceedings reconvened (see CPL 470.05 [2]). Instead, after assuring County Court that he had been afforded sufficient time to confer with...