Opinion
12-02-2015
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Matthew SCANNELL, appellant.
Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Arza Feldman of counsel), for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Arza Feldman of counsel), for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Forman, J.), rendered April 23, 2013, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he should have been afforded an opportunity to withdraw his plea because the County Court was involved in the plea negotiations between his attorneys and the District Attorney is without merit. Although rule 11(c)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure prohibits federal judges from participating in the plea bargaining process (see Fed. Rules Crim. Pro rule 11[c][1] ), it has been recognized that this rule does not apply to state courts, and “does not necessarily establish a constitutional prohibition” (Frank v. Blackburn, 646 F.2d 873, 882; see McMahon v. Hodges, 382 F.3d 284, 289 n. 5; Damiano v. Gaughan, 770 F.2d 1; Toler v. Wyrick, 563 F.2d 372, 374). “In New York State courts, a trial judge is permitted to participate in plea negotiations with criminal defendants” (McMahon v. Hodges, 382 F.3d at 289 n. 5, citing People v. Fontaine, 28 N.Y.2d 592, 593, 319 N.Y.S.2d 847, 268 N.E.2d 644). Accordingly, the fact that the County Court was involved in the defendant's plea negotiations was an insufficient basis upon which to require that the defendant be given an opportunity to withdraw his plea.
RIVERA, J.P., DICKERSON, MALTESE and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.