People v. McClure
| Decision Date | 24 February 1997 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. John D. McCLURE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Verna W. Cobb, Tuxedo, for appellant.
Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen (Gerald D. D'Amelia, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.
Before ROSENBLATT, J.P., and RITTER, COPERTINO and KRAUSMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Byrne, J.), rendered April 5, 1995, convicting him of rape in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
In the early morning hours of May 17, 1994, the defendant raped a local waitress in Wallkill, New York. In exchange for a promised sentence of not more than 5 to 15 years imprisonment, the defendant pleaded guilty to rape in the first degree. The court sentenced him to 4 to 12 years imprisonment. On appeal, the defendant complains that his counsel was ineffective, that the court should have held a hearing on his motion to dismiss the indictment based upon violation of his right to a speedy trial (see, CPL 30.30), and that his sentence was excessive. The defendant's contentions are without merit.
It is well established that where a defendant, on the advice of counsel, has entered a plea of guilty and reaped the benefits of a favorable plea bargain which substantially limits his exposure to imprisonment, he has received adequate representation (see, e.g., People v. Mobley, 221 A.D.2d 376, 633 N.Y.S.2d 203; People v. Navedo, 137 A.D.2d 726, 524 N.Y.S.2d 810). Here, had a jury convicted the defendant of rape in the first degree, he could have received a sentence of 8 1/3 to 25 years imprisonment, rather than the sentence of 4 to 12 years imprisonment actually imposed with the assistance of counsel.
Moreover, violations of a defendant's statutory right to a speedy trial (CPL 30.30) are waived by a plea of guilty (see, e.g., People v. Grandberry, 223 A.D.2d 723, 637 N.Y.S.2d 203; People v. Jones, 214 A.D.2d 623, 626 N.Y.S.2d 809). In any event, there is no merit to the defendant's contention that he was deprived of his right to a speedy trial, or that the County Court should have held a hearing on the matter. The defendant was arrested and arraigned on a felony complaint on May 17, 1994. His arraignment on the indictment took place on July 7, 1994, less than two months later. The People's statement of readiness, dated June 30, 1994, and received by defense counsel on July...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Tavarez
...plea bargain which substantially limits his exposure to imprisonment, he has received adequate representation." People v. McClure, 236 A.D.2d 633, 633 (2d Deptl997). Also, in New York, a defendant must satisfy the "prejudice" requirement by showing that absent counsel's alleged error, he wo......
-
People v. Powell
...plea bargain which substantially limits his exposure to imprisonment, he has received adequate representation” (People v. McClure, 236 A.D.2d 633 [2d Dept 1997] ). A defendant must also satisfy the prejudice requirement by showing that there is a reasonable probability he would have insiste......
-
People v. Asse
...plea bargain which substantially limits his exposure to imprisonment, he has received adequate representation." People v. McClure, 236 A.D.2d 633, 633 (2d Dept 1997). A defendant must also satisfy the "prejudice" requirement by showing that absent counsel's alleged error, he would have insi......
-
The People Of The State Of N.Y. v. Pender, Docket Number: 4153/79
...receive an advantageous plea and that something in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel. (People v. McClure, 236 A.D.2d 633 [2d Dep't 1997].) When a defendant reaped the benefits of a favorable plea and the record does not cast doubt on the effectiveness of counse......