PEOPLE v. COLON

After sufficient inquiry, consisting primarily of the court's consideration of defendant's written submission, the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw her plea (see, People v. Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520). The voluntariness of the plea was established by the record of the thorough plea allocution, in which defendant expressly admitted to every element of felony murder and in which her comprehension of her accessorial liability was manifest. Moreover, defendant's claims that she was innocent and that she was coerced by her attorney into pleading guilty were directly contradicted by her plea allocution.

Defendant received meaningful representation throughout the plea and sentencing proceedings (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714; People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404) and the court was not obligated to appoint new counsel. The record clearly establishes that the court's denial of the plea withdrawal motion was completely independent of counsel's remarks in defense of his own performance (see, People v. Nawabi, 265 A.D.2d 156, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 865). Accordingly, counsel's performance was not adversely affected by a conflict of interest (see,Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 348-349). People v. Davis, 265 A.D.2d 260, 261).

We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.