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. Rakim Paulin, appellant.
Argued-February 10, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered November 8, 2006, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the County Court did not err in determining, after a hearing, that the defendant was “fit to proceed” (see CPL 730.10). The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish a defendant's competence, and the burden requires that fitness to stand trial be established by a preponderance of the evidence (see People v. Mendez, 1 NY3d 15, 19). A competency inquiry involves a legal, not a medical, determination (id. at 20). We are satisfied that the prosecution met its burden and perceive no basis upon which to disturb the County Court's determination.
Since the defendant failed to move to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing, his current contention that the plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v. Toxey, 86 N.Y.2d 725, 726; People v. LeGrady, 50 AD3d 1059, 1060). This is not a case “where the defendant's recitation of the facts underlying the crime pleaded to clearly casts significant doubt upon the defendant's guilt or otherwise calls into question the voluntariness of the plea” (People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666; see People v. McNair, 13 NY3d 821). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was entered “voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently” (People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543; see People v. Goldstein, 12 NY3d 295, 301; People v. Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 781).
The defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, as the record reveals that defense counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).
DILLON, J.P., FLORIO, DICKERSON and COHEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2007-00297 (Ind.No. 15 /06)
Decided: March 08, 2011
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)