People v. Hoppe
| Decision Date | 26 November 1997 |
| Citation | 244 A.D.2d 764,666 N.Y.S.2d 518 |
| Parties | 1997 N.Y. Slip Op. 10,436 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph G. HOPPE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Carl J. Silverstein, Monticello, for appellant.
Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney (Joann Rose Parry, of counsel), Binghamton, for respondent.
Before MIKOLL, J.P., and MERCURE, CREW, WHITE and YESAWICH, JJ.
Appeals (1) from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J.), rendered March 2, 1995, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of sexual abuse in the first degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and (2) by permission, from an order of said court, entered April 15, 1996, which denied defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment of conviction, without a hearing.
Defendant pleaded guilty to sexual abuse in the first degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree in satisfaction of an indictment charging him with attempted rape in the first degree, two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, coercion in the first degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree. Following his sentencing to consecutive indeterminate terms of imprisonment of 3 to 6 years, defendant moved to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10 on the ground that he was covered into accepting the aforesaid plea. County Court denied the motion without a hearing and defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction and, by permission, from the order denying the CPL 440.10 motion.
Initially, we note that by his plea of guilty, defendant has waived his right to review of his claim that he was denied the right to testify before the Grand Jury (see, e.g., People v. Dennis, 223 A.D.2d 814, 636 N.Y.S.2d 453, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 972, 642 N.Y.S.2d 201, 664 N.E.2d 1264). We also reject defendant's assertion of ineffective assistance of counsel, inasmuch as we previously have held that the failure to move to dismiss an indictment for failure to afford a defendant the opportunity to testify before a Grand Jury, standing alone, is insufficient to demonstrate that a defendant was denied meaningful representation (see, People v. Lasher, 199 A.D.2d 595, 605 N.Y.S.2d 973, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 855, 612 N.Y.S.2d 386, 634 N.E.2d 987).
We also find no error in County Court's denial of defendant's CPL 440.10 motion without a hearing. Our review of the record satisfies us that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Galleria
...a Grand Jury, standing alone, is insufficient to demonstrate that a defendant was denied meaningful representation" (People v. Hoppe, 244 A.D.2d 764, 765, 666 N.Y.S.2d 518, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 973, 672 N.Y.S.2d 853, 695 N.E.2d 722; see, People v. Mateo, 252 A.D.2d 821, 677 N.Y.S.2d 187; Pe......
-
People v. Tenace
...that defendant harbored any doubt or reluctance to enter the plea and there is no manifestation of coercion (see, People v. Hoppe, 244 A.D.2d 764, 765, 666 N.Y.S.2d 518, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 973, 672 N.Y.S.2d 853, 695 N.E.2d 722; People v. Toledo, 243 A.D.2d 925, 926, 663 N.Y.S.2d Similarly......
-
People v. Mateo
...indictment pursuant to CPL 190.50(5)(c) by itself does not deny a defendant of meaningful representation (see, People v. Hoppe, 244 A.D.2d 764, 764-765, 666 N.Y.S.2d 518, 519, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 973, 672 N.Y.S.2d 853, 695 N.E.2d 722; People v. Thompkins, 233 A.D.2d 759, 760, 650 N.Y.S.2d ......
-
People v. Lynch
...78 N.Y.2d 1079, 577 N.Y.S.2d 243, 583 N.E.2d 955) and the denial of his request to testify before the Grand Jury (see, People v. Hoppe, 244 A.D.2d 764, 666 N.Y.S.2d 518, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 973, 672 N.Y.S.2d 853, 695 N.E.2d 722; People v. Lasher, 199 A.D.2d 595, 605 N.Y.S.2d 973, lv. denie......