| People v Oakes |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07157 [99 AD3d 1115] |
| October 25, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard"Dicky" Oakes, Appellant. |
—[*1] Derek P. Champagne, District Attorney, Malone (Glenn MacNeill of counsel), forrespondent.
Lahtinen, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main Jr., J.),rendered November 22, 2010, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes ofmanslaughter in the first degree and burglary in the first degree.
Defendant was arrested for his alleged role in the death of an individual who was shot whilein bed and his house then set on fire. He was indicted upon charges of murder in the seconddegree (two counts), arson in the second degree and burglary in the first degree. In a pleaagreement that did not include a specific sentencing commitment, defendant pleaded guilty tomanslaughter in the first degree and burglary in the first degree in full satisfaction of theindictment. Prior to sentencing, he moved to withdraw his plea, arguing that his attorneys failedto provide effective representation and coerced him into pleading guilty. County Court denied themotion and thereafter sentenced defendant to 25 years in prison on each charge, to runconcurrently. Defendant now appeals and we affirm.
Review of the plea reveals that, contrary to defendant's contention, it was made knowingly,voluntarily and intelligently (see Peoplev Deyo, 82 AD3d 1503, 1503-1504 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 815 [2011]; People v Strickland, 77 AD3d1019, 1020-1021 [2010]; People vCarmona, 66 AD3d 1240, 1241 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 799 [2010]). CountyCourt set forth the rights that defendant was giving up by pleading guilty and defendantresponded that he [*2]understood. Defendant acknowledged thathe was guilty of the crimes to which he was pleading and that he had committed the actsdescribed in the charges, which were recited by the court. Further, defendant confirmed that hewas not forced or coerced to plead guilty, he was doing so freely and voluntarily, and he haddiscussed his decision with his counsel. The remaining arguments have been considered and areunpersuasive.
Malone Jr., Stein, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.