People v Williams
2015 NY Slip Op 05217 [129 AD3d 1000]
June 17, 2015
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 5, 2015


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Gary A. Williams, Appellant.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Rosalind C. Gray of counsel),for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County(Efman, J.), rendered November 4, 2009, convicting him of attempted criminalpossession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposingsentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, orintelligently entered because it was affected by his attorney's failure to make any pretrialmotion to suppress evidence is unpreserved for appellate review since he did not raisethat contention when he moved to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing (see People v King, 115 AD3d986 [2014]; People vDelarosa, 104 AD3d 956 [2013]; People v Thomas, 89 AD3d 964, 964-965 [2011], affdsub nom. People v Peque, 22 NY3d 168 [2013]). In any event, a motion to withdrawa guilty plea is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and generally will not bedisturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see People v Seeber, 4 NY3d780 [2005]; People vMcClurkin, 96 AD3d 784, 785 [2012]; People v Bivens, 88 AD3d 808 [2011]; People v Mann, 32 AD3d865, 866 [2006]). Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion indenying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. The record demonstratesthat the defendant entered his plea of guilty knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligentlyupon reaching a favorable plea bargain with the assistance of competent counsel, and thatthe defendant was satisfied with counsel's representation (see People v King, 115AD3d at 987; People vWiedmer, 71 AD3d 1067 [2010]). The defendant's unsubstantiated claim thathis plea was involuntary was refuted by his statements during the plea allocution (see People v Wiedmer, 71AD3d 1067 [2010]; Peoplev Torres, 68 AD3d 1142 [2009]).

To the extent that the defendant is claiming that his attorney rendered ineffectiveassistance of counsel by failing to file a motion to suppress evidence, the allegedineffective assistance did not directly involve the plea bargaining process, and thus, thedefendant forfeited that claim by pleading guilty (see People v McGuire, 122 AD3d 947, 948 [2014]; People v Griffin, 118 AD3d721 [2014]; People vBennett, 115 AD3d 973 [2014]). Hall, J.P., Sgroi, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ.,concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.