People v. Knowles

• Decision Date: 28 December 1998
• Citation: 682 N.Y.S.2d 884
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Steven KNOWLES, a/k/a Steven Barksdale, Appellant. . Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 884

682 N.Y.S.2d 884

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Steven KNOWLES, a/k/a Steven Barksdale, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Dec. 28, 1998.

Ann Luongo, Bronx, N.Y., for appellant.

Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (John M. Collins and Maryanne Luciano of counsel), for respondent.

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Westchester County (Leavitt, J.), both rendered December 5, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 94-00136 and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree under Indictment No. 94-00246, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

The pleas of guilty were entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and with a full understanding of the consequences (see, People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170; People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, 287 N.Y.S.2d 659, 234 N.E.2d 687, cert. denied 393 U.S. 1067, 89 S.Ct. 721, 21 L.Ed.2d 709).

The defendant's factual recitation and the plea colloquy sufficiently established all of the elements of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (see, People v. Katende, 198 A.D.2d 522, 604 N.Y.S.2d 213).

The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400). The defendant's allegations of inadequate representation were belied by the record of the plea proceedings in which he expressly stated, under oath, that he was satisfied with the legal advice that he had received (see, People v. Alicea, 191 A.D.2d 702, 595 N.Y.S.2d 528).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either based on matters dehors the record or without merit (see, People v. Whittaker, 243 A.D.2d 591, 665 N.Y.S.2d 515).

BRACKEN, J.P., COPERTINO, THOMPSON and McGINITY, JJ., concur.