From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Charles

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 23, 2014
116 A.D.3d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-04-23

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Dwight CHARLES, appellant.

Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Arza Feldman of counsel), for appellant. David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (Lauren E. Grasso and Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.


Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Arza Feldman of counsel), for appellant.David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (Lauren E. Grasso and Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (De Rosa, J.), rendered December 16, 2011, convicting him of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (five counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the County Court made a sufficient inquiry into the defendant's claim that his retained attorney had rejected a more favorable pre-indictment plea offer without the defendant's permission, and providently exercised its discretion in accepting defense counsel's explanation that he had rejected the offer because the defendant had instructed him, at that point, to reject any plea offers and to take the case to trial ( see People v. Porto, 16 N.Y.3d 93, 99–100, 917 N.Y.S.2d 74, 942 N.E.2d 283;People v. Sides, 75 N.Y.2d 822, 824, 552 N.Y.S.2d 555, 551 N.E.2d 1233;People v. Medina, 44 N.Y.2d 199, 208, 404 N.Y.S.2d 588, 375 N.E.2d 768). Thus, the defendant received meaningful representation ( see generally People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584;People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146–47, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400). The court also properly denied the defendant's request for assigned counsel, in substitution of his retained counsel, which was made prior to the entry of the defendant's plea. The court properly determined that the defendant did not show good cause to relieve himself of his retained counsel ( see People v. Sides, 75 N.Y.2d at 824, 552 N.Y.S.2d 555, 551 N.E.2d 1233;People v. Medina, 44 N.Y.2d at 208, 404 N.Y.S.2d 588, 375 N.E.2d 768;People v. Martin, 41 A.D.3d 616, 616, 838 N.Y.S.2d 166). Finally, the defendant made no showing of entitlement to assigned counsel to replace his retained counsel ( see People v. Wall, 56 A.D.3d 361, 362, 867 N.Y.S.2d 443). RIVERA, J.P., DICKERSON, COHEN, HINDS–RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Charles

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 23, 2014
116 A.D.3d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

People v. Charles

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Dwight CHARLES, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 23, 2014

Citations

116 A.D.3d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
116 A.D.3d 967
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 2789

Citing Cases

People v. Ruiz-Solano

The defendant's contention that she was denied the right to counsel of her choice at the sentencing…