People v. Seger
| Decision Date | 25 March 1991 |
| Citation | 567 N.Y.S.2d 554,171 A.D.2d 892 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Allan J. SEGER, a/k/a Joseph Salvatore, a/k/a "A.J.", Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
John Savoca, White Plains, for appellant.
Carl A. Vergari, Dist. Atty., White Plains (Mary E. Costello and Maryanne Luciano, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and KUNZEMAN, KOOPER and HARWOOD, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered March 29, 1990, convicting him of murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the County Court properly exercised its discretion in declining to permit the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea. The record provides no support for the defendant's conclusory assertion at sentence that his attorney "coerced" him into entering the plea, given his statements during the extensive plea colloquy to the contrary, his representation that he knowingly and voluntarily entered the plea, and his admission that he had committed the crimes to which he admitted guilt (see, People v. Long, 157 A.D.2d 504, 549 N.Y.S.2d 696; People v. Moore, 156 A.D.2d 395, 548 N.Y.S.2d 346; see also, People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544; People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329). The defendant's further contention that the court should have conducted a hearing on his vacatur motion since he admitted to being medicated with anti-depressant drugs is similarly without merit. The defendant unequivocally stated that although he was on medication, he was aware of what was going on and that his faculties were not impaired by the medication ( see, People v. Ostrander, 136 A.D.2d 760, 761, 523 N.Y.S.2d 219; People v. Bangert, 107 A.D.2d 752, 753, 484 N.Y.S.2d 117). We note, moreover, that during the plea colloquy, the defendant was lucid, rational and unequivocal in assuring the court on numerous occasions that he fully comprehended the meaning of the plea proceeding. Since the defendant was afforded an ample opportunity to state the basis of his withdrawal application on the record, the court was not required to conduct an evidentiary hearing into the defendant's claims of incapacity and coercion (see, People v. Tinsley, supra;...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Ames
... ... Bouges, 129 A.D.2d 967, 514 N.Y.S.2d 576; see also, People v. Claudio, 64 N.Y.2d 858, 487 N.Y.S.2d 318, 476 N.E.2d 644; cf., People v. Gomez, 174 A.D.2d 949, 571 N.Y.S.2d 838, lv. denied, 79 N.Y.2d 827, 580 N.Y.S.2d 207, 588 N.E.2d 105; People v. Seger, 171 A.D.2d 892, 567 N.Y.S.2d 554, lv. dismissed, 78 N.Y.2d 1081, 577 N.Y.S.2d 244, 583 N.E.2d 956). The record as a whole establishes that defendant's guilty plea was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered in the presence of and with the aid of counsel and after the court had fully ... ...
-
People v. Draper
...443; People v. Brownlee, 158 A.D.2d 610, 551 N.Y.S.2d 581; People v. Long, 157 A.D.2d 504, 549 N.Y.S.2d 696; see also, People v. Seger, 171 A.D.2d 892, 567 N.Y.S.2d 554; People v. O'Keefe, 170 A.D.2d 1020, 566 N.Y.S.2d 166). Further, when the defendant made his subsequent application to wit......
-
People v. Cummings
... ... The transcript of the plea reveals that defendant was lucid and rational; County Court questioned defendant concerning the effects of his medication and was assured by defendant that he was cognizant of the proceedings and was not impaired by the medication (see, People v. Seger, 171 A.D.2d 892, 567 N.Y.S.2d 554, lv. dismissed 78 N.Y.2d 1081, 577 N.Y.S.2d 244, 583 N.E.2d 956; People v. Ostrander, 136 A.D.2d 760, 523 N.Y.S.2d 219). Furthermore, defendant offered no evidence that he suffered from any side effects from the medication which impaired his cognitive ability in ... ...
-
People v. Martin
...117; see also, People v. Parker, 191 A.D.2d 717, 595 N.Y.S.2d 519; People v. Gomez, 174 A.D.2d 949, 571 N.Y.S.2d 838; People v. Seger, 171 A.D.2d 892, 567 N.Y.S.2d 554; People v. Barnett, 136 A.D.2d 555, 523 N.Y.S.2d 174; People v. Gosso, 130 A.D.2d 683, 516 N.Y.S.2d 20). The defendant's cl......