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, etc., respondent, v. William ELTING III, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered September 20, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. By decision and order dated December 1, 2003, this court remitted the matter to the County Court, Dutchess County, to hear and report on the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, and the appeal was held in abeyance in the interim (see People v. Elting, 2 A.D.3d 455, 767 N.Y.S.2d 828). The County Court, Dutchess County, has filed its report.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was coerced is without merit. At the hearing on his motion to withdraw his plea, the defendant's former attorneys and a private investigator expressly contradicted the defendant's testimony that he had been advised that he would not succeed at trial because the Dutchess County courts and the trial judge were racist. After the hearing, the County Court credited the testimony of those witnesses and rejected the defendant's testimony as not credible. On this record, we see no reason to disturb the hearing court's determination as to the credibility of the witnesses (see People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380).
Moreover, the mere fact that the defendant's trial attorney had a pessimistic view of the defendant's chances of succeeding at trial and that the defendant faced a significantly longer prison sentence if convicted after trial did not constitute coercion (see People v. Jones, 232 A.D.2d 505, 648 N.Y.S.2d 331; People v. Spinks, 227 A.D.2d 310, 643 N.Y.S.2d 54; People v. Samuel, 208 A.D.2d 776, 617 N.Y.S.2d 494). In fact, the record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily pleaded guilty (see People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170).
Accordingly, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty (see People v. Jones, supra; People v. Palmeri, 227 A.D.2d 418, 642 N.Y.S.2d 555; People v. Samuel, supra ).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 23, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)