Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Marvin WILSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), rendered June 7, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him a term of 5 years, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about August 23, 2005, which denied defendant's CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment, unanimously affirmed.
After making a suitable inquiry, the court properly denied defendant's plea withdrawal motion (see People v. Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520, 410 N.Y.S.2d 555, 382 N.E.2d 1332 [1978] ). Defendant was not entitled to a hearing on his unsupported claim that he failed to comprehend the plea proceedings due to alleged mental illness and side effects from psychiatric medication (see e.g. People v. Rodriguez, 302 A.D.2d 317, 754 N.Y.S.2d 874 [2003], lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 657, 760 N.Y.S.2d 122, 790 N.E.2d 296 [2003] ). During the plea allocution, defendant was completely lucid, and he specifically acknowledged that his medication did not affect his ability to understand the proceedings and enter a guilty plea.
Defendant was not denied his right to effective and conflict-free assistance of counsel on his plea withdrawal motion where his counsel reported to the court that defendant's psychiatrist had informed counsel there was no reason to question defendant's mental competency (see People v. Friedman, 39 N.Y.2d 463, 467-468, 384 N.Y.S.2d 408, 348 N.E.2d 883 [1976]; compare People v. Rozzell, 20 N.Y.2d 712, 282 N.Y.S.2d 775, 229 N.E.2d 452 [1967] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 20, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)