People v. Tuttle
| Decision Date | 06 June 1988 |
| Citation | 530 N.Y.S.2d 158,141 A.D.2d 584 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Erika TUTTLE, Appellant. |
Diebold, Bermingham, Gorman, Cook & Ginsberg, P.C., Buffalo (Mark J. Mahoney, of counsel), for appellant.
Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty., Riverhead (John J. Ribeiro, of counsel), for respondent.
Before THOMPSON, J.P., and WEINSTEIN, EIBER and HARWOOD, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Sherman, J.), rendered November 7, 1984, convicting her of attempted petit larceny, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant, originally indicted for robbery in the second degree, pleaded guilty to the substantially reduced charge of attempted petit larceny following negotiations which spanned several months. The record before us demonstrates that both the court and the defendant were fully informed of the factors prompting the favorable offer and that the defendant had ample opportunity to consider whether to accept it. During the thorough plea allocution, the defendant unequivocally admitted her guilt and provided factual detail supporting the plea. Her subsequent generalized assertion of innocence did not entitle her to withdraw it ( see, People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329; People v. Grady, 110 A.D.2d 780, 488 N.Y.S.2d 58; People v. Matta, 103 A.D.2d 756, 477 N.Y.S.2d 228), and the County Court's inquiry upon the defendant's application to withdraw her plea was, under the circumstances, appropriate ( see, People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, 355, 287 N.Y.S.2d 659, 234 N.E.2d 687, cert. denied sub nom. Robinson v. New York, 393 U.S. 1067, 89 S.Ct. 721, 21 L.Ed.2d 709; cf., People v. Gatling, 84 A.D.2d 539, 443 N.Y.S.2d 101). The defendant's guilty plea "was voluntarily made with the advice of counsel following an appraisal of all the relevant factors" ( People v. Dixon, supra, 29 N.Y.2d at 57, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329) and we conclude that denial of the defendant's motion to withdraw her guilty plea was a proper exercise of discretion.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Molina
...that she was satisfied with her attorney's representation (see People v. Addeo, 224 A.D.2d 539, 638 N.Y.S.2d 351 ; People v. Tuttle, 141 A.D.2d 584, 585, 530 N.Y.S.2d 158 ). The record as a whole affirmatively demonstrates that the defendant entered her plea of guilty knowingly, voluntarily......
-
People v. Kelland
...contentions and find them to be without merit (see, e.g., People v. Gardner, 150 A.D.2d 722, 541 N.Y.S.2d 592; People v. Tuttle, 141 A.D.2d 584, 530 N.Y.S.2d 158; People v. Grady, 110 A.D.2d 780, 488 N.Y.S.2d ...
-
People v. Rancka, 1
...of innocence and claims of coercion do not entitle him to withdraw his pleas (see, People v. Latimer, supra; People v. Tuttle, 141 A.D.2d 584, 530 N.Y.S.2d 158; People v. Melendez, 135 A.D.2d 660, 522 N.Y.S.2d 235, lv. denied 70 N.Y.2d 1008, 526 N.Y.S.2d 943, 521 N.E.2d 1086). Therefore, we......
-
People v. Williams
...did not entitle him to withdraw his plea (see, People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 57, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329; People v. Tuttle, 141 A.D.2d 584, 530 N.Y.S.2d 158; People v. Matta, 103 A.D.2d 756, 477 N.Y.S.2d 228). Moreover, the record establishes that the defendant, while represented ......