People v. Kafka
| Citation | 128 A.D.2d 895,513 N.Y.S.2d 820 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Gary KAFKA, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 30 March 1987 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Paul Vladimir, Kew Gardens, for appellant.
Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty., Riverhead (Patricia A. Murphy, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BROWN, J.P., and NIEHOFF, EIBER and SULLIVAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McInerney, J.), rendered April 16, 1985, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed and the case is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50(5).
The trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying without a hearing the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. The record reveals that the defendant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently entered his plea of guilty (see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170), acknowledging his guilt "without apparent hesitation or claims of innocence" (People v. Stubbs, 110 A.D.2d 725, 728, 487 N.Y.S.2d 824). The defendant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to advance his claims by the court, which had presided over the suppression hearing and thus had the benefit of testimony linking the defendant to the stolen property which was the subject of the indictment (see, People v. Colon, 114 A.D.2d 967, 495 N.Y.S.2d 414; People v. Stubbs, supra ), yet the defendant failed to substantiate his bold allegations of innocence, coercion and ignorance as to the ramifications of the plea, which were rendered particularly unpersuasive in light of his prior experience with the law (see, People v. Morris, 118 A.D.2d 595, 499 N.Y.S.2d 13; People v. Colon, supra ).
The defendant's claim that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney "ineptly" advised him to plead guilty following a suppression hearing which revealed "clear" 4th Amendment violations is unpersuasive. The defendant knowingly waived his right to appeal the suppression determination by withdrawing all motions made prior to entering his plea of guilty (see, People v. Williams, 36 N.Y.2d 829, 370 N.Y.S.2d 904, 331 N.E.2d 684, cert. denied 423 U.S. 873, 96 S.Ct. 141, 46 L.Ed.2d 104; People v. Feingold, 125 A.D.2d 587, 510 N.Y.S.2d 7). We reject the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Doherty
...crimes (People v. Soto, 129 A.D.2d 748, 514 N.Y.S.2d 508, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 657, 518 N.Y.S.2d 1051, 512 N.E.2d 577; People v. Kafka, 128 A.D.2d 895, 513 N.Y.S.2d 820, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 951, 516 N.Y.S.2d 1035, 509 N.E.2d 370; People v. Colon, 125 A.D.2d 484, 509 N.Y.S.2d 579). Moreover......
-
People v. Williams
...... By so withdrawing his pretrial motions, the defendant waived his right to appellate review of the Trial Judge's suppression determination and is precluded from now raising suppression issues on appeal (see, People v. Kafka, 128 A.D.2d 895, 513 N.Y.S.2d 820; People v. Feingold, 125 A.D.2d 587, 510 N.Y.S.2d 7; People v. Colarusso, 103 A.D.2d 848, 478 N.Y.S.2d 74; see also, People v. Williams, 36 N.Y.2d 829, 370 N.Y.S.2d 904, 331 N.E.2d 684, cert. denied 423 U.S. 873, 96 S.Ct. 141, 46 L.Ed.2d 104). ......
-
People v. Smith
...suppression hearing and thus had the benefit of eyewitness testimony linking defendant to the attempted burglary (see, People v. Kafka, 128 A.D.2d 895, 513 N.Y.S.2d 820, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 951, 516 N.Y.S.2d 1035, 509 N.E.2d 370), yet defendant failed either to substantiate his belated pro......
-
People v. Jones
...Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520, 526, 410 N.Y.S.2d 555, 382 N.E.2d 1332; People v. Pettway, 140 A.D.2d 721, 529 N.Y.S.2d 32; People v. Kafka, 128 A.D.2d 895, 513 N.Y.S.2d 820). ...