PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David C. FARLEY, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree (Penal Law § 220.43 ) and related offenses. We reject the contention of defendant that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw the plea without first conducting a hearing. “Only in the rare instance will a defendant be entitled to an evidentiary hearing [on a motion to withdraw his plea of guilty]; often a limited interrogation by the court will suffice” (People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927, 365 N.Y.S.2d 161, 324 N.E.2d 544). Contrary to the further contention of defendant, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The assertions of defendant, that he was denied effective assistance of counsel and that the plea was coerced, are belied by his statements during the plea colloquy (see People v. Forshey, 294 A.D.2d 868, 741 N.Y.S.2d 486, lv. denied 98 N.Y.2d 675, 746 N.Y.S.2d 464, 774 N.E.2d 229; People v. Rickard, 262 A.D.2d 1073, 691 N.Y.S.2d 811, lv. denied 94 N.Y.2d 828, 702 N.Y.S.2d 599, 724 N.E.2d 391; People v. Witcher, 222 A.D.2d 1016, 635 N.Y.S.2d 908, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 1027, 644 N.Y.S.2d 160, 666 N.E.2d 1074).
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal from the judgment insofar as it imposed sentence be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed (see People v. Haywood, 203 A.D.2d 966, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1016, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 967, 616 N.Y.S.2d 20, 639 N.E.2d 760) and the judgment is affirmed.