People v. Sanchez
| Decision Date | 01 June 1992 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Andre SANCHEZ, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Dolores Kanski, Yonkers, for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Jay M. Cohen, Roseann B. Mackechnie and Shulamit Rosenblum, of counsel), for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE, J.P., and EIBER, O'BRIEN and COPERTINO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered December 1, 1989, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in December 1988 with the understanding that he would be released from custody in order to cooperate with the District Attorney's office in certain investigations. A written cooperation agreement between the District Attorney and the defendant, which was incorporated into the plea agreement, gave the District Attorney sole discretion to determine whether the defendant's cooperation was "meaningful and substantial". The plea agreement further provided that if the defendant cooperated, he would be permitted to withdraw his plea to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, a class B felony, and plead to a lesser charge. If he absconded, the District Attorney would recommend imposition of the maximum sentence for the B felony. Sentencing was adjourned for 60 days, and, when the defendant failed to appear on that date, a bench warrant was issued. He was arrested several months later in Connecticut. At his sentencing in December 1989 the defendant moved to withdraw his plea based on allegations that he was innocent and that the People failed to fulfill certain promises which had induced him to plead guilty.
We find that the court properly declined to vacate the defendant's plea based on his unsubstantiated claim of innocence (see, People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329; People v. Ochoa, 179 A.D.2d 689, 579 N.Y.S.2d 114). The record of the plea allocution establishes that the defendant voluntarily pleaded guilty with the advice of counsel and without any protestations of innocence. His belated claim of innocence was supported solely by the affirmation of his attorney and was contradicted by the affirmation of the assistant district attorney who signed the cooperation agreement. The court did not err in declining to hold a hearing on the defendant's motion as he was afforded a reasonable opportunity to advance his contentions (see, People v. Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Decker
...854, 816 N.Y.S.2d 760, 849 N.E.2d 983 [2006] ; People v. Salvagni, 199 A.D.2d 680, 680, 605 N.Y.S.2d 125 [1993] ; People v. Sanchez, 184 A.D.2d 537, 538, 584 N.Y.S.2d 164 [1992], lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 909, 588 N.Y.S.2d 835, 602 N.E.2d 243 [1992] ). While defendant's Saratoga County guilty pl......
-
People v. Copes
...during the plea colloquy that no off-the-record promises had been made to induce him to plead guilty (see People v. Sanchez, 184 A.D.2d 537, 538, 584 N.Y.S.2d 164, lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 909, 588 N.Y.S.2d 835, 602 N.E.2d 243 ; see also Brady, 122 A.D.3d at 1010–1011, 995 N.Y.S.2d 418 ).It is ......
- People v. Reed
-
People v. Roy
...at the plea proceeding, provided no basis to vacate the plea (see, People v. Walsh, --- A.D.2d ----, 665 N.Y.S.2d 514; People v. Sanchez, 184 A.D.2d 537, 584 N.Y.S.2d 164) or to conduct a hearing on the subject (see, People v. Dickerson, 163 A.D.2d 610, 559 N.Y.S.2d The sentence imposed was......