| People v Mortensen |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 02387 [60 AD3d 971] |
| March 24, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Joseph Mortensen, Appellant. |
—[*1] Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Ronnie Jane Lamm of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hudson, J.),rendered February 27, 2008, convicting him of attempted rape in the third degree, upon his pleaof guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's motion towithdraw his plea based on recantation evidence (see CPL 220.60 [3]). The defendant'splea of guilty was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People vFiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988];People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 17 [1983]). Recantation evidence is inherently unreliableand insufficient, alone, to justify setting aside a conviction (see People v Serrata, 261AD2d 490 [1999]; People v Legette, 153 AD2d 760, 761 [1989]; compare People vDe Jesus, 199 AD2d 529, 531 [1993]). The defendant's claim that his motion to withdrawthe plea should have been granted because, in advising the complainant at the sentencing hearingof the law on perjury, the court assumed the role of advocate, coerced the complainant not totestify, and deprived the defendant of an opportunity to advance his claims, is unpreserved forappellate review and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Arnold, 98 NY2d 63,67 [2002]; People v Melendez, 31 AD3d 186, 197 [2006]).[*2]
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit(see People v Chin, 67 NY2d 22, 32 [1986]; People v Owens, 63 NY2d 824,825-826 [1984]; People v Shapiro, 50 NY2d 747, 760 [1980]; People v Singh, 47AD3d 733, 734 [2008]; People v Williams, 169 AD2d 798, 799 [1991]). Skelos, J.P.,Fisher, Santucci and Balkin, JJ., concur.