From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Goode-Ford

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 25, 2022
205 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

Opinion

2020–02324 S.C.I. No. 16–00585

05-25-2022

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Kaliek GOODE–FORD, appellant.

Samuel S. Coe, White Plains, NY, for appellant. David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.


Samuel S. Coe, White Plains, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.

BETSY BARROS, J.P., ANGELA G. IANNACCI, ROBERT J. MILLER, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Robert H. Freehill, J.), rendered January 28, 2020, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. Reviewing the record as a whole, we conclude that the defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see People v. Jamison , 197 A.D.3d 569, 570, 151 N.Y.S.3d 694 ; People v. Meyn , 193 A.D.3d 1080, 1081, 146 N.Y.S.3d 305 ). Further, there is no support in the record for the defendant's contention that he lacked the capacity to understand the proceedings against him (see People v. Arce , 196 A.D.3d 696, 697, 148 N.Y.S.3d 687 ).

The defendant's contention that the County Court should have held a hearing prior to imposing an enhanced sentence is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant neither requested such a hearing nor moved to withdraw his plea on this ground (see People v. Shealy, 195 A.D.3d 1047, 1048, 146 N.Y.S.3d 797 ). In any event, the court providently exercised its discretion in imposing the enhanced sentence without a hearing, since the defendant did not deny that he was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, of a postplea crime in violation of the conditions of his plea agreement (see People v. Knee, 174 A.D.3d 646, 101 N.Y.S.3d 866 ; People v. Cousar, 128 A.D.3d 716, 716–717, 9 N.Y.S.3d 96 ).

BARROS, J.P., IANNACCI, MILLER and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Goode-Ford

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 25, 2022
205 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
Case details for

People v. Goode-Ford

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Kaliek GOODE–FORD, appellant.

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

Date published: May 25, 2022

Citations

205 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
205 A.D.3d 1051

Citing Cases

People v. Roberts

Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's…

People v. Roberts

Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's…