People v. Stewart

• Decision Date: 17 July 2003
• Citation: 307 A.D.2d 533,763 N.Y.S.2d 688
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>RAYMOND STEWART, Appellant.

307 A.D.2d 533
763 N.Y.S.2d 688

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,
v.
RAYMOND STEWART, Appellant.

Kane, J.

Decided July 17, 2003.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain and Rose, JJ., concur.

Kane, J.

Fire damaged a condemned apartment building where defendant formerly resided. Arson was suspected, as electric and gas services had been terminated, no combustible materials were stored there, and there were three separate fires in the living rooms of three different apartments. When defendant was questioned by police shortly after the fires started, he admitted to having been in the building that evening and that he dropped cigarettes and a lit match in two different apartments, but denied knowledge of any fire. After indictment, defendant

[307 A.D.2d 534]

agreed to enter a plea to arson in the third degree with a recommended sentence of 3 to 6 years in prison and waiver of his right to appeal. After defendant stated that he would plead guilty but that he started the fire accidentally, not intentionally, he was permitted to enter an Alford plea and received the agreed upon sentence. Defendant now appeals his conviction and the denial of his subsequent CPL 440.10 motion.

The issues raised by defendant may be addressed on a CPL article 440 motion or can be raised on direct appeal despite a waiver of appeal. Defendant first contends that County Court improperly accepted his Alford plea. An Alford plea, wherein the accused is permitted to enter a guilty plea without admitting culpability, may be allowed only where such plea "is the product of a voluntary and rational choice, and the record before the court contains strong evidence of actual guilt" (Matter of Silmon v Travis, 95 NY2d 470, 475 [2000]; see North Carolina v Alford, 400 US 25, 37 [1970]). The defendant is not required to make a factual recitation confirming guilt; the court may accept the plea if satisfied that there is a sufficient factual basis for the plea based on its review of the information before it (see People v Clemons, 299 AD2d 666, 667 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 627 [2003]). Protestations of innocence do not preclude the court from accepting an Alford plea (see People v Crandall, 272 AD2d 717, 717 [2000]).

Here, strong evidence of guilt was contained in the grand jury minutes and motion submissions, including statements from defendant and three witnesses, all of which was reviewed by County Court before defendant's plea was taken (see People v Clemons, supra at 667; People v...