People v. Muir

• Decision Date: 05 October 2022
• Docket Number: 2016–04579,Ind. No. 1865/15
• Citation: 174 N.Y.S.3d 867 (Mem)
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Noel MUIR, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

174 N.Y.S.3d 867 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Noel MUIR, appellant.

2016–04579
Ind. No. 1865/15

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—September 12, 2022
October 5, 2022

Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Benjamin Welikson of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Marie John–Drigo of counsel), for respondent.

BETSY BARROS, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, LARA J. GENOVESI, HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruth Shillingford, J.), rendered April 4, 2016, convicting him of grand larceny in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant entered a plea of guilty to one count of grand larceny in the second degree. Prior to sentencing, he moved to withdraw his plea of guilty. The Supreme

174 N.Y.S.3d 868

Court denied the motion without a hearing and imposed sentence. The defendant appeals.

"The decision to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously entered plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the court and generally will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of [that] discretion" ( People v. Jamison, 197 A.D.3d 569, 570, 151 N.Y.S.3d 694 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see CPL 220.60[3] ; People v. Torres, 192 A.D.3d 831, 832, 143 N.Y.S.3d 102 ). "In general, ‘such a motion must be premised upon some evidence of possible innocence or of fraud, mistake, coercion or involuntariness in the taking of the plea’ " ( People v. Hollmond, 191 A.D.3d 120, 136, 135 N.Y.S.3d 449, quoting People v. De Jesus, 199 A.D.2d 529, 530, 606 N.Y.S.2d 255 ). "When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry ‘rest[s] largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the motion is made’ and a hearing will be granted only in rare instances" ( People v. Brown, 14 N.Y.3d 113, 116, 897 N.Y.S.2d 674, 924 N.E.2d 782, quoting People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544 ; see People v. Hollman, 197 A.D.3d 484, 484, 151 N.Y.S.3d 158 ).

Here, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. Reviewing the record as a whole and the circumstances surrounding the entry of the plea (see People v. Sougou, 26 N.Y.3d 1052, 1055, 23 N.Y.S.3d 121, 44 N.E.3d 196 ), we conclude that the...