PEOPLE v. TORRES (2009)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Donnino, J.), rendered February 7, 2008, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

It is well settled that the right of a defendant to withdraw a previously entered plea of guilty rests within the sound discretion of the sentencing 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 that determination will generally not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of discretion (see People v. DeLeon, 40 A.D.3d 1008, 837 N.Y.S.2d 189). In this case, the record reveals that the defendant entered his plea of guilty knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, having reached a favorable plea bargain with the assistance of competent counsel with whose representation the defendant was satisfied (see People v. Mann, 32 A.D.3d 865, 821 N.Y.S.2d 616). Furthermore, contrary to the defendant's arguments on appeal, “[a]n attorney assigned to represent a defendant in a criminal case has no duty 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; see People v. Rodriguez, 181 A.D.2d 643, 582 N.Y.S.2d 109; People v. Glasper, 151 A.D.2d 692, 693, 542 N.Y.S.2d 747).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.