People v. Marryshow

• Decision Date: 27 January 2016
• Docket Number: 2014-06681,Ind. No. 13-00255.
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Victor MARRYSHOW, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

135 A.D.3d 964
24 N.Y.S.3d 170
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 00522

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Victor MARRYSHOW, appellant.

2014-06681
Ind. No. 13-00255.

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

Jan. 27, 2016.

24 N.Y.S.3d 171

Arleen Lewis, Blauvelt, N.Y., for appellant.

Thomas P. Zugibe, District Attorney, New City, N.Y. (Itamar J. Yeger of counsel), for respondent.

135 A.D.3d 964

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered June 24, 2014, convicting him of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The County Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and its determination generally will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see CPL 220.603; People v. Seeber, 4 N.Y.3d 780, 793 N.Y.S.2d 826, 826 N.E.2d 797; People v. Edmunson, 109 A.D.3d 621, 970 N.Y.S.2d 635; People v. Dazzo, 92 A.D.3d 796, 938 N.Y.S.2d 446; People v. Caruso, 88 A.D.3d 809, 930 N.Y.S.2d 668). The court's remarks at the outset of the plea proceeding, that the People's plea offer would no longer be available if the defendant proceeded with the suppression hearing, were informative and not coercive (see e.g. People v. Solis, 111 A.D.3d 654, 655, 974 N.Y.S.2d 132; People v. Strong, 80 A.D.3d 717, 914 N.Y.S.2d 679; People v. Bravo, 72 A.D.3d 697, 698, 899 N.Y.S.2d 280). Likewise, the court's

135 A.D.3d 965

statement to the defendant, who was not a United States citizen, that his plea of guilty would lead to his removal from the United States, properly advised the defendant of the consequences of his plea and was not coercive (see People v. Peque, 22 N.Y.3d 168, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617; People v. Morocho, 129 A.D.3d 1107, 1108, 11 N.Y.S.3d 684; People v. Taveras, 123 A.D.3d 745, 997 N.Y.S.2d 490). Furthermore, the defendant's unequivocal acknowledgment under oath during the plea proceeding that no...