People v. Mitchell
| Decision Date | 02 June 1986 |
| Citation | 121 A.D.2d 403,502 N.Y.S.2d 805 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Minnie MITCHELL, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Robert C. D'Alvia, Croton-on-Hudson (Lora C. Grahamn, of counsel), for appellant.
Carl A. Vergari, Dist. Atty., White Plains (Douglas J. Martino and Maryanne Luciano, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and THOMPSON, NIEHOFF, RUBIN and KUNZEMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.), both rendered November 28, 1983, each convicting her of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, upon her pleas of guilty, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to two indeterminate terms of imprisonment of two to four years, to run concurrently.
Judgments affirmed.
The defendant failed to meet her burden of proving that her prior felony conviction was unconstitutionally obtained (see, CPL 400.21[7][b]; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 15, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170). To the contrary, it appears that the defendant's guilty plea to the prior crime was knowingly and voluntarily made upon the advice of competent counsel whose efforts on the defendant's behalf had resulted in a rational plea bargain from which the defendant had derived a substantial benefit (see, People v. Pacheco, 114 A.D.2d 913, 495 N.Y.S.2d 83). At the time of the plea, the defendant was not a novice to the criminal court system, having pleaded guilty to five prior misdemeanors. The defendant admitted that at the time of the plea, she knew she did not have to plead guilty, that she had a right to go to trial and that the decision was hers. The experienced prosecutor who recommended acceptance of the defendant's plea testified that it was his practice to always advise a defendant of his or her right to a jury trial and that a guilty plea was a waiver of said right. Under the circumstances, the fact the defendant was not specifically advised that by pleading guilty she was waiving her privilege against self-incrimination and the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses does not render the conviction constitutionally infirm (see, People v. Harris, supra, 61 N.Y.2d at pp. 16-17, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170; People v. Pacheco, supra; People v. Cummings, 106 A.D.2d 294, 483 N.Y.S.2d 7). Moreover, the court was not required to advise the defendant of a collateral consequence of her plea,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. U.S. Currency in the Amount of $228,536.00
...no requirement that Parker be informed that it might someday occur. Roman, 141 A.D.2d at 601, 529 N.Y.S.2d at 522; People v. Mitchell, 121 A.D.2d 403, 502 N.Y.S.2d 805 (1986). Certain possible consequences of a guilty plea are "collateral" rather than direct and need not be explained to the......
-
People v. Jackson
...v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d at 21–22, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170; People v. Sargent, 100 A.D.2d 978, 475 N.Y.S.2d 117; People v. Mitchell, 121 A.D.2d 403, 502 N.Y.S.2d 805). Contrary to the People's contention, the defendant's challenge to his adjudication as a second felony offender is not p......
-
People v. Coleman
...; People v. McNair, 79 A.D.3d at 909, 912 N.Y.S.2d 421 ; Holtzman v. Roman, 141 A.D.2d 601, 529 N.Y.S.2d 522 ; People v. Mitchell, 121 A.D.2d 403, 502 N.Y.S.2d 805 ; see also United States v. United States Currency in Amount of $228,536.00, 895 F.2d 908, 916 [2d Cir] ). Accordingly, the def......
-
People v. Austin
...People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 15; see also, People v Hannon, 209 A.D.2d 319, 320-321; People v Outer, 197 A.D.2d 543; People v Mitchell, 121 A.D.2d 403). The defendant waived his claim concerning the denial of his suppression motion (see, People v Kemp, 94 N.Y.2d 831, 833; People v Ross, 27......