| People v Chaney |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02874 [72 AD3d 1194] |
| April 8, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Raquan R.Chaney, Appellant. |
—[*1]
Kavanagh, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.),rendered December 19, 2007, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime ofcriminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
Defendant was charged in a four-count indictment with two counts of criminal possession ofa weapon in the second degree, attempted assault in the first degree and criminal use of a firearmin the second degree.[FN*]As pretrial hearings were about to begin, defendant agreed to enter a guilty plea to criminalpossession of a weapon in the second degree and waive his right to appeal his sentence inexchange for a commitment by County Court that his sentence not exceed nine years in prisonplus three years of postrelease supervision. One month later, when defendant appeared forsentencing, he made an oral application to withdraw his guilty plea claiming that his assignedcounsel had misinformed him regarding the length of the sentence that could have been imposedif he had rejected the plea and had been convicted of all of the crimes listed in the indictment. Healso maintained that it was his understanding when he entered his guilty plea that County Courthad agreed to impose a 3½-year prison term as his sentence. Given [*2]the nature of these claims, County Court adjourned sentencing andnew counsel was assigned to represent defendant, who submitted a written motion on defendant'sbehalf to withdraw the guilty plea. County Court denied defendant's motion to withdraw hisguilty plea and sentenced defendant to a prison term of eight years, plus three years ofpostrelease supervision.
Defendant argues on this appeal that trial counsel did not provide him with meaningfulrepresentation and specifically claims that counsel failed to adequately explain the legal optionspresented by the plea offers made to him during the course of his prosecution. These claims arenot supported by the record. " 'In the context of a guilty plea, a defendant has been affordedmeaningful representation when he or she receives an advantageous plea and nothing in therecord casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel' " (People v Singletary, 51 AD3d1334, 1335 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 741 [2008], quoting People v Ford,86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; see People vCarmona, 66 AD3d 1240, 1242 [2009]; People v Lee, 51 AD3d 1217, 1217-1218 [2008]). Initially, wenote that defendant's contentions regarding his trial counsel involve matters that, for the mostpart, are outside the record and, as such, are not a proper subject for our review (see People v Brown, 68 AD3d1150, 1151 [2009]; People vFiske, 68 AD3d 1149, 1150 [2009]).
Moreover, it is undisputed that defendant's guilty plea served to significantly reduce thepotential prison sentence that he could have received had he gone to trial and been convicted ofall of the charges contained in the indictment. In addition, counsel made appropriate pretrialmotions on defendant's behalf and was about to represent his interests at a Wade/Huntleyhearing when defendant entered his guilty plea. Also, we note that defendant had previouslyrejected a plea offer made to him by the prosecution and, prior to entering his guilty plea, he wasgiven numerous opportunities to confer with counsel as well as members of his family regardinghis legal options and the benefits offered by accepting the proposed plea. As a result, it is ourview that counsel provided meaningful representation prior to and at the time defendant enteredhis guilty plea (see People vJackson, 67 AD3d 1067, 1068-1069 [2009]).
More importantly, during the plea allocution, County Court conducted a detailed inquiry ofdefendant to insure that he fully understood the legal ramifications of giving up his right to trialand entering a guilty plea. In addition, throughout this process, the court provided defendant withample opportunity to confer with counsel and his mother to insure that the plea was knowinglyand voluntarily entered. As such, defendant's claims regarding his guilty plea are not supportedby the record and the judgment of conviction should be affirmed (see People v Ashley, 71 AD3d1286, 1287 [2010]; People vJeske, 55 AD3d 1057, 1058 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 898 [2008]).
Spain, J.P., Rose, Stein and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Footnote *: The charges stemmed from anincident during which defendant discharged a firearm into a crowd of people but, fortunately, noone was injured.