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. Eric YOUNG, Defendant-Appellant.
On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140 .25[2] ), defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his alleged “motion” to withdraw his plea on the ground that the plea was not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered. Of the three grounds raised in support of his contention on appeal, defendant preserved only one of them for our review, and we decline to exercise our power to review the two unpreserved grounds as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[6][a] ). The ground that is preserved for our review is that defendant lacked the mental ability to enter a plea of guilty. At sentencing, defense counsel advised the court that defendant had “mental issues” and that he “felt coerced into entering the plea,” whereupon the court specifically addressed issues relating to defendant's competency. We note that, although defendant made no formal motion to withdraw the plea, the court was given “ ‘the opportunity to address the perceived error and to take corrective measures' “ (People v. Louree, 8 N.Y.3d 541, 545, 838 N.Y.S.2d 18, 869 N.E.2d 18). We conclude on the record before us, however, that nothing in the record of the plea proceeding establishes that defendant's alleged mental illness “so stripped [defendant] of orientation or cognition that he lacked the capacity to plead guilty” (People v. Alexander, 97 N.Y.2d 482, 486, 743 N.Y.S.2d 45, 769 N.E.2d 802). “A history of prior mental illness or treatment does not itself call into question defendant's competence” (People v. Taylor, 13 A.D.3d 1168, 1169, 787 N.Y.S.2d 539, lv denied 4 N.Y.3d 836, 796 N.Y.S.2d 591, 829 N.E.2d 684; see People v. Williams, 35 A.D.3d 1273, 1275, 825 N.Y.S.2d 862, lv denied 8 N.Y.3d 928, 834 N.Y.S.2d 519, 866 N.E.2d 465), and defendant's responses to the court's inquiries appeared to be informed, competent and lucid (see People v. Hayes, 39 A.D.3d 1173, 1175, 834 N.Y.S.2d 784, lv denied 9 N.Y.3d 923, 844 N.Y.S.2d 178, 875 N.E.2d 897; People v. Beaty, 303 A.D.2d 965, 755 N.Y.S.2d 911, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 559, 763 N.Y.S.2d 816, 795 N.E.2d 42). We thus conclude that defendant's plea was properly entered.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
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: October 02, 2009
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)