People v. Velez
| Decision Date | 14 February 1995 |
| Citation | 212 A.D.2d 647,622 N.Y.S.2d 576 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Juan VELEZ, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Noah Lipman, New York City, for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens (Steven J. Chananie and Pamela J. Lynam of counsel, Brent P. Reilly, on the brief), for respondent.
Before LAWRENCE, J.P., and RITTER, FRIEDMANN and KRAUSMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Dwyer, J.), rendered December 20, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial of the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea and the denial of a second motion to vacate his guilty plea.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The record reflects that the Supreme Court expressly warned the defendant that if he did not appear for sentencing it would not be bound by its promise to impose a sentence of only one to three years imprisonment. Although the court's warning was somewhat elliptical, the defendant's understanding of it can readily be inferred from the record. Thus, the court was not required to permit the defendant to withdraw his plea before imposing an enhanced sentence (see, e.g., People v. Thorpe, 189 A.D.2d 903, 592 N.Y.S.2d 990; People v. McCoy, 182 A.D.2d 713, 582 N.Y.S.2d 479; People v. McNeill, 164 A.D.2d 951, 559 N.Y.S.2d 1012; cf., People v. Scrivens, 175 A.D.2d 671, 572 N.Y.S.2d 271; People v. White, 144 A.D.2d 711, 535 N.Y.S.2d 72; People v. Sumner, 137 A.D.2d 891, 524 N.Y.S.2d 571).
Although the transcript of the plea proceeding does not reflect the presence of a Spanish interpreter, the court's calendar sheet has an annotation: "Spanish Int. Pres." In addition, the defendant's counsel announced on the record that he had discussed the plea with his client and his client's family through an interpreter, and the defendant has not complained that his counsel was ineffective. The transcript of the plea proceeding reflects that the defendant answered all of the questions that were addressed to him without confusion or hesitation, and at no point did he ask for clarification or for an interpreter (People v. Perez, 198 A.D.2d 446, 604 N.Y.S.2d 152). The defendant described his participation in the crime in terms that evidenced his full understanding of the plea agreement. The court,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Thompson
-
People v. Capuano
... ... Therefore, since the defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with a crime, the court was free to impose a higher sentence (see, People v. Canecchia, 234 A.D.2d 606, 652 N.Y.S.2d 62; People v. Velez, 212 A.D.2d 647, 622 N.Y.S.2d 576; People v. Caridi, 148 A.D.2d 625, 539 N.Y.S.2d 88) ... Furthermore, upon inquiry, the defendant admitted that he had been arrested after contraband was found in the vehicle in which he was a passenger. Therefore, a hearing was not necessary ... ...
-
People v. Canecchia
... ... The defendant's understanding of the conditions of the pleas can readily be ascertained from the record. Thus, the court was not required to permit the defendant to withdraw his pleas of guilty before imposing enhanced sentences (see, People v. Velez, 212 A.D.2d 647, 622 N.Y.S.2d 576; see also, People v. Caridi, 148 A.D.2d 625, 539 N.Y.S.2d 88) ... ...
-
People v. Anonymous
... ... denied 90 N.Y.2d 906, 663 N.Y.S.2d 518, 686 N.E.2d 230), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that defendant was sufficiently warned of the consequences of absconding or committing new crimes (see, People v. Velez, 212 A.D.2d 647, 622 N.Y.S.2d 576) ... SULLIVAN, J.P., and ... ...