PEOPLE v. MICKENS (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Joseph D. MICKENS, appellant.

Decided: December 27, 1999

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN and HOWARD MILLER, JJ.

James M. Montgomery, New York, N.Y., for appellant. James M. Catterson, Jr., District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Susan I. Braitman of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Cacciabaudo, J.), rendered March 23, 1999, convicting him of arson in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

At the plea proceeding, the Supreme Court told the defendant that if he got into “any trouble” before the sentencing he would not receive the promised sentence. The defendant was subsequently arrested, and at the sentencing, the Supreme Court denied his application to withdraw his plea or for a hearing to determine the “facts and circumstances” of the post-plea arrest. Contrary to the defendant's contention, since he neither raised any issue concerning the validity of the charge upon which the post-plea arrest was based, nor denied any involvement in the underlying crime, the Supreme Court did not err in denying his application (see, People v. Wilson, 257 A.D.2d 674, 685 N.Y.S.2d 93; People v. Maupin, 198 A.D.2d 236, 604 N.Y.S.2d 801).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network