| People v Casiano |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 06136 [210 AD3d 692] |
| November 2, 2022 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Anthony Casiano, Appellant. |
Kelley M. Enderley, Poughkeepsie, NY, for appellant.
Miriam E. Rocah, District Attorney, White Plains, NY (William C. Milaccio andDaniel H. Davis of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County(Barry E. Warhit, J.), rendered July 11, 2019, convicting him of attempted burglary in thethird degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing,the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. A motion to withdraw a plea restswithin the sound discretion of the court, and generally the court's determination will notbe disturbed absent an improvident exercise of its discretion (see CPL 220.60 [3];People v Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 485 [2002]; People v Richards, 186 AD3d1411, 1412 [2020]). Contrary to the defendant's arguments on appeal, since the courtpermitted both sides to submit papers in support of and in opposition to the motion, thedefendant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his contentions (see People v Manor, 27 NY3d1012, 1013 [2016]; People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926, 927 [1974]).
It is well-settled that "when a motion to withdraw a plea is patently insufficient on itsface, a court may simply deny the motion without making any inquiry" (People v Mitchell, 21 NY3d964, 967 [2013]). Contrary to the defendant's contentions, he was not entitled towithdraw his plea, nor was the County Court required to conduct a hearing on themotion, since he proffered only unsubstantiated and conclusory assertions of innocenceand confusion as to the nature of the plea, which were contradicted by the record (see People v Hollmond, 191AD3d 120, 136-137 [2020]; People v Griffith, 78 AD3d 1194, 1195 [2010]).
In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty wasknowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Richards, 186AD3d at 1412). Duffy, J.P., Rivera, Dowling and Taylor, JJ., concur.