Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997

People v. Simpson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 15, 1997

238 A.D.2d 193; 656 N.Y.S.2d 724; 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3964

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

Jesse Hines v. David Miller, Superintendent (2d Cir. 2003)
Rowe v. Miller (District Court, S.D. New York 2004)
People v. Loadholt (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
People v. Johnson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
People v. Rowe (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
People v. Hines (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Vincent Quattrochi, J.), rendered December 21, 1993, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him to a term of 2 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.

*194Since defendant violated every term of his plea agreement, the court properly imposed an enhanced sentence (see, People v Figgins, 87 NY2d 840, 841). Defendant’s contention that his guilty plea was involuntary because he was not apprised of the post-plea conditions until after accepting the plea bargain is unpreserved for review, and without merit (see, People v Lewis, 214 AD2d 415, lv denied 86 NY2d 797; People v Ramirez, 210 AD2d 56, lv denied 84 NY2d 1037). The court properly denied defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, which was based on conclusory claims of innocence, coercion, and ineffective assistance of counsel (People v Ortiz, 221 AD2d 176). Since defendant’s application was without merit, defense counsel’s representation at the motion to withdraw his guilty plea was not ineffective, and the court did not need to appoint new counsel upon defense counsel’s refusal to adopt defendant’s motion (People v Ortiz, supra, at 177).

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur— Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.