People v. Morris
| Decision Date | 31 January 1985 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Donald Ivan MORRIS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Lawrence J. Knickerbocker, Cortland, for appellant.
Richard J. Shay, Cortland County Dist. Atty., Cortland (John A. Gemelli, Law Intern, Albany, of counsel), for respondent.
Before KANE, J.P., and MAIN, CASEY and WEISS, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Cortland County, rendered November 16, 1983, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.
Defendant was charged in two separate indictments with the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth, fifth and seventh degrees. Initially, he entered a plea of not guilty. However, on August 22, 1983, the day his trial was scheduled to begin, defendant withdrew the not guilty plea and, pursuant to a plea-bargaining agreement, pleaded guilty to the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.
On September 9, 1983, defense counsel notified the trial court that defendant wished to withdraw his guilty plea on the ground that it was the product of duress. Defendant alleged that his guilty plea had been coerced by a threat which he had received in jail on the eve of trial, when a fellow inmate warned him that he would be seriously injured or killed if he took the stand and mentioned the name of a certain defendant in another drug case.
Following a hearing on September 20, 1983, defendant's motion to withdraw his plea was denied. He was subsequently sentenced as a predicate felony offender, pursuant to the plea bargain, to a term of two to four years' imprisonment.
On this appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. We disagree. At the guilty plea withdrawal hearing and in his subsequent appearances before the court, defendant raised his allegations of duress but failed to substantiate them with any supporting evidence. Accordingly, the trial court was faced only with the issue of defendant's credibility, which it resolved against him. It has been held that a defendant is not entitled to withdraw his guilty plea based solely on subsequent unsupported allegations of innocence (People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 56-57, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329; cf. People v. Flowers, 30 N.Y.2d 315, 317, 333 N.Y.S.2d 393, 284 N.E.2d 557). This is especially true where, as here, the transcript of the plea hearing reveals that defendant's plea was voluntarily and knowingly made. In the instant matter, defendant was ably represented by an attorney with whom he stated that he had fully discussed the advisability of his guilty plea. Further, defendant admitted in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Henderson
...682 N.Y.S.2d 245 ), and entirely uncorroborated (see Nash, 288 A.D.2d at 937, 732 N.Y.S.2d 201 ; 46 N.Y.S.3d 323People v. Morris, 107 A.D.2d 973, 974–975, 484 N.Y.S.2d 697 ; cf. 145 A.D.3d 1555People v. Flowers, 30 N.Y.2d 315, 317–319, 333 N.Y.S.2d 393, 284 N.E.2d 557 ). Under those circums......
-
People v. Zuk
...... Moreover, defendant offers no evidence that he was misinformed, other than by his own conclusionary self-serving assertions. Thus, it is clear that County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his plea (see, People v. Morris, 107 A.D.2d 973, 974, 484 N.Y.S.2d 697; People v. Kelsch, 96 A.D.2d 677, 679, 466 N.Y.S.2d 535; People v. Eagan, 90 A.D.2d 909, 456 N.Y.S.2d 872). Finally, defendant's argument that County Court abused its discretion in failing to conduct a full evidentiary hearing on his ......
-
People v. Stubbs
......Tinsley, (35 NY2d, [926] at p 927 [365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544], supra ), '[o]nly in the rare instance will a defendant be entitled to an evidentiary hearing; often a limited interrogation * * * will suffice.' " (accord People v. Jenkins, 90 A.D.2d 854, 456 N.Y.S.2d 106; People v. Morris, 107 A.D.2d 973, 484 N.Y.S.2d 697 [3d Dept. 1985] ). Review of the record in the case at bar reveals that the defendant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to advance his claims and that Criminal Term properly denied the motion to withdraw the defendant's plea of guilty to ......
-
People v. Smith
......Martin, 168 A.D.2d 794, 564 N.Y.S.2d 503). The minutes of the plea reveal that it was knowingly and voluntarily made and defendant admitted during the allocution the necessary elements of the charged crime (see, People v. Morris, 107 A.D.2d 973, 484 N.Y.S.2d 697). Furthermore, at sentencing County Court expressed its concern over the statements made in the letter and at three separate points in the proceeding informed defendant that he could request new counsel and seek to vacate his plea, to which defendant repeatedly ......