People v. Viscomi
Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment entered upon a guilty plea convicting him of two counts of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [2], [3]) and other crimes arising from the robbery of a pizza delivery man. We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel by the failure of his assigned counsel to support his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. “An attorney assigned to represent a defendant in a criminal case has no duty to participate in a baseless pro se motion to withdraw a plea of guilty which was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made [citations omitted] * * * Assigned counsel did not argue in opposition to the defendant’s motion, become a witness against him, or make any statements which were adverse to him [citations omitted]. Rather, counsel attempted to clarify the circumstances surrounding the plea proceedings” (People v Caple, 279 AD2d 635, 635-636).
The knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his contention that Supreme Court erred in accepting his guilty plea without first considering his application for new assigned counsel (see, People v Dunkins, 231 AD2d 587, lv denied 89 NY2d 863; see also, People v Morgan, 275 AD2d 970, lv denied 96 NY2d 761; People v Segrue, 274 AD2d 671, lv denied 95 NY2d 908). In any event, defendant waived final determination of that application by pleading guilty before it was decided (see, People v Corti, 88 AD2d 345, 349-350; see also, People v Delarosa, 215 AD2d 773, lv denied 86 NY2d 793).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.