People v. Martin
| Citation | 614 N.Y.S.2d 150,204 A.D.2d 353 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph Henry MARTIN, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 02 May 1994 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
David Goodman, Poughkeepsie (David Steinberg, of counsel; Jennifer S. Goodman, on the brief), for appellant.
William V. Grady, Dist. Atty., Poughkeepsie (Matthew G. Tice, of counsel), for respondent.
Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), rendered April 17, 1991, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree under Indictment No. 5/88, upon his plea of guilty, and (2) a judgment of the same court (King, J.), also rendered April 17, 1991, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree under Indictment No. 121/87, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.
ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.
The record amply demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered his pleas of guilty (see, People v. Bangert, 107 A.D.2d 752, 484 N.Y.S.2d 117; see also, People v. Parker, 191 A.D.2d 717, 595 N.Y.S.2d 519; People v. Gomez, 174 A.D.2d 949, 571 N.Y.S.2d 838; People v. Seger, 171 A.D.2d 892, 567 N.Y.S.2d 554; People v. Barnett, 136 A.D.2d 555, 523 N.Y.S.2d 174; People v. Gosso, 130 A.D.2d 683, 516 N.Y.S.2d 20). The defendant's claim of incompetence due to his lack of medication at the time of the pleas is unsupported by the record (see, People v. Gomez, supra; People v. Seger, supra; People v. Bangert, supra ). Therefore, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's motions to withdraw his pleas without a hearing (see, People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544; People v. Elliott, 187 A.D.2d 666, 590 N.Y.S.2d 257; People v. Buckley, 139 A.D.2d 589, 527 N.Y.S.2d 83; People v. Corwise, 120 A.D.2d 604, 502 N.Y.S.2d 223).
To continue reading
Request your trial