PEOPLE v. POOLER (2009)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Donnino, J.), rendered May 17, 2007, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

 The decision to permit a defendant to withdraw a previously-entered plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the court (see People v. Seeber, 4 N.Y.3d 780, 793 N.Y.S.2d 826, 826 N.E.2d 797;  People v. Mann, 32 A.D.3d 865, 821 N.Y.S.2d 616;  People v. Kucharczyk, 15 A.D.3d 595, 790 N.Y.S.2d 522), and this determination generally will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see People v. DeLeon, 40 A.D.3d 1008, 837 N.Y.S.2d 189).   Here, the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered his negotiated plea of guilty with the assistance of competent counsel, in exchange for a favorable sentence promise (see People v. Mann, 32 A.D.3d 865, 821 N.Y.S.2d 616).   Moreover, contrary to the defendant's arguments, his attorney was not obligated to “participate in a baseless pro se motion to withdraw a plea of guilty which was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made” (People v. Caple, 279 A.D.2d 635, 635, 720 N.Y.S.2d 166).   Nor is there any merit to the defendant's contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Brooks, 36 A.D.3d 929, 930, 828 N.Y.S.2d 553;  People v. Grimes, 35 A.D.3d 882, 883, 827 N.Y.S.2d 268).