PEOPLE v. HOSGOR (2005)

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

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Cetin HOSGOR, appellant.

Decided: December 12, 2005

HOWARD MILLER, J.P., STEPHEN G. CRANE, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, REINALDO E. RIVERA, and ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.

James M. Montgomery, Amityville, N.Y., for appellant. Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Anne E. Oh of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Ohlig, J.), rendered July 12, 2004, convicting him of attempted sodomy in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 17, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170). To the extent that the defendant's statements at sentencing may be deemed to constitute a pro se motion to vacate his plea of guilty, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that motion without directing a hearing or assigning new counsel (see People v. Reynolds, 4 A.D.3d 490, 771 N.Y.S.2d 677; People v. Anderson, 284 A.D.2d 544, 545, 727 N.Y.S.2d 632). The defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of the plea is based on matter which is dehors the record (see People v. Bruno, 269 A.D.2d 540, 704 N.Y.S.2d 492).

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Out of date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!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law