| People v Wiedmer |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02600 [71 AD3d 1067] |
| March 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Frederick J. Wiedmer, Appellant. |
—[*1] Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Robert A. Schwartz and Laurie K.Gibbons of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Jaeger, J.),rendered March 12, 2008, convicting him of reckless endangerment in the first degree andassault in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the County Court(see People v McGhee, 62 AD3d 1027 [2009]; People v Hughes, 62 AD3d 1026[2009]; People v Pooler, 58 AD3d 757 [2009]), whose determination generally will notbe disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see People v DeLeon, 40AD3d 1008, 1009 [2007]). Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion indenying the defendant's pro se application to withdraw his plea of guilty. The defendant enteredhis plea of guilty knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, having reached a favorable pleabargain with the assistance of competent counsel with whose representation the defendant wassatisfied (see People v McGhee, 62 AD3d at 1027; People v Mann, 32 AD3d865, 866 [2006]). The defendant's unsubstantiated claim that his plea was coerced was refuted byhis statements during the plea allocution (see People v Hughes, 62 AD3d at 1026;People v Turner, 23 AD3d 503, 503-504 [2005]), as was his claim that his plea wasinduced by a promise which could not be fulfilled (see People v Bullard, 33 AD3d 715[2006]; cf. People v Feliciano, 21 AD3d 1036, 1037 [2005]).
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel restsmainly on matter dehors the record and, thus, cannot be reviewed on direct appeal (seePeople v Drago, 50 AD3d 920 [2008]; People v DeLuca, 45 AD3d 777 [2007];People v Sanchez, 33 AD3d 633, 634 [2006]). To the extent this contention is reviewableon the record before us, we find that counsel provided the defendant with meaningfulrepresentation (see People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]). Dillon, J.P., Florio, Millerand Austin, JJ., concur.