Opinion
2001-04340
Argued May 24, 2002.
June 25, 2002.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lott, J.), rendered April 24, 2001, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Deborah A. Schwartz, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Karol B. Mangum of counsel), for respondent.
SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, SANDRA L. TOWNES, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty (see CPL 220.60; People v. Weekes, 289 A.D.2d 599; People v. Badger, 288 A.D.2d 485; People v. Marzocco, 278 A.D.2d 515). There is nothing in any of the defendant's statements at the plea allocution which "clearly casts significant doubt" upon his guilt (People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666). The defendant admitted to all of the factual allegations underlying the crime after they were recited to him by the Supreme Court, and he made no statement which tended to negate an essential element of the crime (see People v. Rivera, 266 A.D.2d 576, 577). Moreover, at no time during the plea allocution did the defendant raise a viable justification defense to the crime to which he pleaded guilty and, therefore, the Supreme Court was not required to question the defendant as to a potential justification defense (see People v. Toxey, 86 N.Y.2d 725, 726; People v. Lopez, supra at 667; People v. Reyes, 247 A.D.2d 639; People v. Negron, 222 A.D.2d 327; People v. Brewley, 211 A.D.2d 805, 806; People v. Carter, 187 A.D.2d 666; see also People v. Bartlett, 215 A.D.2d 489, 490). The plea allocution minutes demonstrate that the defendant's plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and that he understood the crime to which he was pleading guilty (see People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9; People v. Chiovaro, 261 A.D.2d 632, 633).
The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).
We note that the defendant included in the judgment roll copies of the minutes of the Grand Jury proceedings. The defendant's motion to expand the judgment roll on appeal to include these minutes was denied by decision and order of this court dated February 19, 2002. Therefore, we have not considered the Grand Jury minutes in reaching our determination.
FEUERSTEIN, J.P., O'BRIEN, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.