People v. Melendez

Citation522 N.Y.S.2d 235,135 A.D.2d 660
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Juan MELENDEZ, Appellant.
Decision Date14 December 1987
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Anthony Allan D'Amore, New York City, for appellant.

Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood and Darrell Fields, of counsel; Marcia Thurmond, on the brief), for respondent.



Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marano, J.), rendered February 27, 1986, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The decision of whether to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously entered plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the sentencing court (CPL 220.60[3]; People v. Stubbs, 110 A.D.2d 725, 727, 487 N.Y.S.2d 824; People v. Kelsch, 96 A.D.2d 677, 678, 466 N.Y.S.2d 535). In the instant case, the plea was knowingly and voluntarily made in the presence of competent counsel after the court had fully apprised the defendant of the consequences of his plea. Significantly, the defendant's earlier admission of guilt was not accompanied by any claim of innocence. Inasmuch as the defendant was afforded ample opportunity to state the basis for his withdrawal application, no error resulted from the absence of an evidentiary hearing with respect to his conclusory allegations that he was in fact innocent and that his lack of faith in counsel and his confusion at the time his plea was entered had resulted in an involuntary guilty plea (see, People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544; People v. Morris, 107 A.D.2d 973, 975, 484 N.Y.S.2d 697; People v. Kelsch, supra, 96 A.D.2d at 678, 466 N.Y.S.2d 535).

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • People v. Rancka, 1
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 28 d5 Maio d5 1993
    ...entitle him to withdraw his pleas (see, People v. Latimer, supra; People v. Tuttle, 141 A.D.2d 584, 530 N.Y.S.2d 158; People v. Melendez, 135 A.D.2d 660, 522 N.Y.S.2d 235, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 1008, 526 N.Y.S.2d 943, 521 N.E.2d 1086). Therefore, we conclude that the court did not abuse its ......
  • People v. Martella
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 14 d1 Dezembro d1 1987
  • People v. Melendez
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 2 d2 Fevereiro d2 1988

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT