People v. McGriff
| Decision Date | 05 June 1995 |
| Citation | 627 N.Y.S.2d 773,216 A.D.2d 330 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Lorenzo McGRIFF, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Daniel L. Greenberg, New York City (Antonio J. Casas, of counsel), for appellant.
Appellant pro se.
Charles J. Hynes, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie and Caroline R. Donhauser, of counsel; Cheryl A. Reynolds, on the brief), for respondent.
Before BALLETTA, J.P., and MILLER, SANTUCCI and ALTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered June 28, 1993, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court did not err by denying the defendant's application to withdraw his plea of guilty on the grounds of coercion and self-defense. The determination of whether to allow a defendant to withdraw a plea of guilty is a matter that rests with the sound discretion of the trial court (see, CPL 220.60[3]; People v. Ochoa, 179 A.D.2d 689, 579 N.Y.S.2d 114; People v. Rivera, 177 A.D.2d 664, 576 N.Y.S.2d 365).
The record in this case clearly establishes that the defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered his plea of guilty (see, People v. Callahan, 80 N.Y.2d 273, 590 N.Y.S.2d 46, 604 N.E.2d 108). The defendant testified at the hearing that was conducted in connection with his motion to withdraw his plea that he was not pressured or forced into pleading guilty. Furthermore, when it became apparent during the plea allocution that the defendant may have had a claim of self-defense, the court carefully and thoroughly explained to the defendant the law of justification and how it applied to the facts of this case. Only after the defendant repeatedly assured the court that he understood the nature of a justification defense and that he, nevertheless, still wished to plead guilty, did the court finally accept his plea. Moreover, the defendant did not state at the hearing that he had failed to understand the court's prior explanation of the defense of justification, nor did he present any evidence that would have supported such a defense.
The defendant's sentence is not excessive (see, People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 437 N.Y.S.2d 961, 419 N.E.2d 864; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions, including those found...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Martin
-
People v. Ramsingh
...to withdraw a guilty plea is a matter that rests within the sound discretion of the trial court (see, CPL 220.60; People v. McGriff, 216 A.D.2d 330, 627 N.Y.S.2d 773; People v. Ochoa, 179 A.D.2d 689, 579 N.Y.S.2d 114; People v. Rivera, 177 A.D.2d 664, 576 N.Y.S.2d The record fully supports ......
-
People v. Flakes
...it is well settled that a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is addressed to the sound discretion of the court (see, People v. McGriff, 216 A.D.2d 330, 627 N.Y.S.2d 773; People v. Jones, 214 A.D.2d 623, 626 N.Y.S.2d 809), and a plea of guilty will be upheld if it was entered knowingly, vol......
-
People v. Addeo
...N.Y.S.2d 586) and he expressly acknowledged that as part of his plea, he was waiving any claim of self defense (see, People v. McGriff, 216 A.D.2d 330, 627 N.Y.S.2d 773). He acknowledged that he had discussed his plea with counsel and was satisfied with the representation he received (see, ......