| People v Wren |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 05573 [119 AD3d 1291] |
| July 31, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| 1 The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vTimothy J. Wren, Appellant. |
Teresa C. Mulliken, Harpersfield, for appellant.
Richard D. Northrup Jr., District Attorney, Delhi (John L. Hubbard of counsel), forrespondent.
McCarthy, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Delaware County(Becker, J.), rendered January 28, 2013, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty ofthe crimes of grand larceny in the third degree and committing a fraudulent practice.
Defendant was charged with various crimes in an 11-count indictment stemmingfrom the filing of fraudulent work activity reports and the receipt of workers'compensation benefits to which he was not entitled between February 2009 and January2012. In full satisfaction of the indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to one count ofgrand larceny in the third degree and one count of committing a fraudulent practice inexchange for a negotiated prison term of 1 to 3 years on each count to be servedconcurrently, but consecutively to a term that defendant was currently serving for anunrelated offense, and $23,850 in restitution. Defendant thereafter moved to withdrawhis plea. County Court denied defendant's motion without a hearing and imposed theagreed-upon sentence. Defendant appeals.
We affirm. The decision as to whether a defendant should be permitted to withdrawhis or her guilty plea is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court and a hearingis only warranted when the record presents a genuine issue of fact with respect to itsvoluntariness (see People vRavenell, 114 AD3d 997, 998 [2014]; People v Brandon, 112 AD3d 1069, 1070 [2013]). Absentevidence of innocence, fraud or mistake in the inducement, a plea generally may [*2]not be withdrawn (see People v Ravenell, 114AD3d at 998; People vArnold, 102 AD3d 1061, 1062 [2013]). Here, during the plea colloquy,defendant related that he had ample opportunity to discuss the plea bargain with counseland was satisfied with counsel's performance, that nobody had made any promises orthreats and that he was pleading guilty voluntarily, and he admitted to the conductconstituting the crimes. County Court clarified defendant's answers, so we find nothingin the record that casts doubt upon his guilt. Inasmuch as there is no substantiation for hislater assertions of innocence and undue pressure from counsel, we cannot conclude thatthe court erred in denying the motion to withdraw the plea without a hearing (seePeople v Brandon, 112 AD3d at 1070; People v Arnold, 102 AD3d at1062).
We also find no merit to defendant's assertion that he was deprived of the effectiveassistance of counsel. "In the context of a guilty plea, a defendant has been affordedmeaningful representation when he or she receives an advantageous plea and nothing inthe record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel" (People v Sylvan, 108 AD3d869, 870 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 1091 [2014] [internal quotation marksand citations omitted]). Here, counsel made appropriate pretrial motions, and defendant'splea represented a significant reduction in the potential consecutive prison sentences hefaced should he have been convicted on all 11 counts of the indictment. Accordingly, weconclude that counsel was effective in his representation of defendant (see People vSylvan, 108 AD3d at 870; People v Leszczynski, 96 AD3d 1162, 1162-1163 [2012],lv denied 19 NY3d 998 [2012]).
Stein, J.P., Egan Jr., Lynch and Clark, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.