From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Roesch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 17, 2001
289 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

1999-06145

Submitted November 16, 2001.

December 17, 2001.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rienzi, J.), rendered May 7, 1999, convicting him of sodomy in the first degree, aggravated sexual abuse in the third degree, and endangering the welfare of a child (three counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Andrew C. Fine, New York, N.Y. (Dawn E. Scott of counsel), for appellant.

William L. Murphy, District Attorney, Staten Island, N.Y. (Karen F. McGee and David Frey of counsel; Christopher Izzo and Lisa Michael on the brief), for respondent.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty without holding a hearing. The defendant's claim that his plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because he was under the influence of legal and illegal drugs when he entered it was unsubstantiated. The record reveals that the defendant was lucid, rational, and unequivocal in assuring the Supreme Court that he comprehended the meaning of the plea proceeding. Further, two psychiatrists examined the defendant shortly before he entered his plea, and found him competent to stand trial. The defendant offered only the conclusory affirmation of his counsel asserting that the defendant was under the influence of drugs when he entered his plea of guilty, which was insufficient to require a hearing on his motion to withdraw his plea (see, People v. Bristol, 273 A.D.2d 248; People v. Rodriguez, 270 A.D.2d 434; People v. Torres, 215 A.D.2d 702, 703).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

O'BRIEN, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Roesch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 17, 2001
289 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Roesch

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. JOSEPH ROESCH, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 17, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 421 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
734 N.Y.S.2d 240

Citing Cases

Roesch v. Fischer

On December 17, 2001, the Appellate Division affirmed. It found that the trial court had properly denied,…

People v. Wilson

The court conducted a suitable inquiry in which defendant received an adequate opportunity to be heard (see…