AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. WILLIAM WOLMART, appellant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The County Court denied the defendant's request for an adjournment when one of the two attorneys representing him failed to appear on the scheduled trial date. The case was tried, but while the jury was deliberating, the defendant pleaded guilty. As part of the plea agreement, the defendant waived his right to appeal, including a specific waiver of any claim that he was denied the right to be represented by co-counsel. Prior to sentencing, the defendant moved to vacate his plea, contending that he was denied the right to counsel of his choice and that his plea was coerced by the court. The court denied his motion and subsequently sentenced him in accordance with the plea agreement.

The defendant waived his right to appeal his claim that he was deprived of his right to counsel of his choice, except to the extent that it may have affected the voluntariness of his plea ( see People v. Miller, 306 A.D.2d 294; People v. Morgan, 275 A.D.2d 970; People v. Segrue, 274 A.D.2d 671). The defendant's plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered and was not induced by the denial of his right to counsel or any alleged threats by the court ( see People v. Allen, 273 A.D.2d 319). Consequently, the court properly denied his motion to vacate his plea.

ALTMAN, J.P., SMITH, H. MILLER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. WOLMART
(Mar 22, 2004)