From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Dogan

Court of Appeals of New York.
Sep 14, 2021
37 N.Y.3d 1007 (N.Y. 2021)

Opinion

No. 68 SSM 14

09-14-2021

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kevin DOGAN, Appellant.

David C. Schopp, Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Alan Williams of counsel), for appellant. John J. Flynn, District Attorney, Buffalo (David A. Heraty of counsel), for respondent.


David C. Schopp, Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Alan Williams of counsel), for appellant.

John J. Flynn, District Attorney, Buffalo (David A. Heraty of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

We review the summary denial of a CPL article 440 motion under an abuse of discretion standard (see

People v. Wright, 27 N.Y.3d 516, 520, 35 N.Y.S.3d 286, 54 N.E.3d 1157 [2016] ). It is well settled that a court may deny a CPL 440.10 motion without conducting a hearing if "[t]he motion is based upon the existence or occurrence of facts and the moving papers do not contain sworn allegations substantiating or tending to substantiate all the essential facts" ( CPL 440.30[4][b] ). Here, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's CPL 440.10 motion without a hearing because, under the circumstances presented, defendant failed to sufficiently allege " ‘a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's [alleged] errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial’ " ( People v. Hernandez, 22 N.Y.3d 972, 975, 978 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1 N.E.3d 785 [2013], quoting Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 [1985] ). Moreover, defendant failed to otherwise "show that the nonrecord facts sought to be established ... would entitle him to relief" ( People v. Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796, 799, 497 N.Y.S.2d 903, 488 N.E.2d 834 [1985] ). Accordingly, County Court did not abuse its discretion in determining that defendant was not entitled to a hearing.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson, Singas and Cannataro concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People v. Dogan

Court of Appeals of New York.
Sep 14, 2021
37 N.Y.3d 1007 (N.Y. 2021)
Case details for

People v. Dogan

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kevin DOGAN, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of New York.

Date published: Sep 14, 2021

Citations

37 N.Y.3d 1007 (N.Y. 2021)
174 N.E.3d 699
37 N.Y.3d 1007

Citing Cases

People v. Hartle

statute creates a presumption that a hearing will be granted; only in the limited circumstances set out…

People v. Hartle

Here, the motion court abused its discretion in denying defendant's motion without a hearing (see People v …