| People v Days |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 01345 [125 AD3d 1508] |
| February 13, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vRayshon Days, Appellant. |
Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Christine M. Cook of counsel), fordefendant-appellant.
Rayshon Days, defendant-appellant pro se.
William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (Victoria M. White of counsel),for respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.),rendered August 24, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, ofmanslaughter in the first degree.
It is hereby ordered that the case is held, the decision is reserved and the matter isremitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings in accordance with thefollowing memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon hisplea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]).We agree with defendant that County Court failed to afford him the requisite "reasonableopportunity to present his contentions" on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea(People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926, 927 [1974]; see People v Frederick, 45NY2d 520, 525 [1978]; People v Carter, 144 AD2d 1034, 1035 [1988]). Prior tosentencing, defendant wrote a letter to the sentencing court seeking to withdraw his pleaon several grounds. Because certain of the grounds involved alleged improprieties on thepart of the sentencing court, the court transferred the matter to another judge fordetermination of defendant's motion. It appears from the sentencing transcript, however,that the newly-assigned judge either did not have or did not review defendant's movingpapers, and the judge refused defendant's repeated requests to submit his writtencontentions in support of the motion (cf. People v Gaskin, 2 AD3d 347, 347 [2003], lvdenied 2 NY3d 740 [2004]; People v Martin, 186 AD2d 823, 824 [1992],lv denied 81 NY2d 791 [1993]). Although the court verbally inquired into certainof defendant's claims, we cannot conclude that the judge "was sufficiently familiar withthe case to make an informed determination on defendant's motion to withdraw the plea"(People v Thompson, 60 AD2d 765, 765 [1977]). For instance, in response todefendant's assertion regarding the justification defense, the court stated: "I don't knowwhat happened there. That was their point. I am just here to sentence you." We thereforeconclude that, under the circumstances of this case, defendant was not "afford[ed]. . . a reasonable opportunity to advance his claims [such that] an informedand prudent determination [could] be rendered" (Frederick, 45 NY2d at 525). Wetherefore hold the case, reserve decision, and remit the matter to County Court to afforddefendant a reasonable opportunity to present his contentions in support of his motion towithdraw his plea (see People v Anderson, 222 AD2d 515, 515-516 [1995]).Present—Peradotto, J.P., Carni, Sconiers and Whalen, JJ.