The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Richard “Dicky” OAKES, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main Jr., J.), rendered November 22, 2010, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of manslaughter in the first degree and burglary in the first degree.
Defendant was arrested for his alleged role in the death of an individual who was shot while in bed and his house then set on fire. He was indicted upon charges of murder in the second degree (two counts), arson in the second degree and burglary in the first degree. In a plea agreement that did not include a specific sentencing commitment, defendant pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the first degree and burglary in the first degree in full satisfaction of the indictment. Prior to sentencing, he moved to withdraw his plea, arguing that his attorneys failed to provide effective representation and coerced him into pleading guilty. County Court denied the motion and thereafter sentenced defendant to 25 years in prison on each charge, to run concurrently. Defendant now appeals and we affirm.
Review of the plea reveals that, contrary to defendant's contention, it was made knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently (see People v. Deyo, 82 A.D.3d 1503, 1503–1504, 922 N.Y.S.2d 569 , lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 815, 929 N.Y.S.2d 804, 954 N.E.2d 95 ; People v. Strickland, 77 A.D.3d 1019, 1020–1021, 909 N.Y.S.2d 172 ; People v. Carmona, 66 A.D.3d 1240, 1241, 887 N.Y.S.2d 370 , lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 799, 899 N.Y.S.2d 133, 925 N.E.2d 937  ). County Court set forth the rights that defendant was giving up by pleading guilty and defendant responded that he understood. Defendant acknowledged that he was guilty of the crimes to which he was pleading and that he had committed the acts described in the charges, which were recited by the court. Further, defendant confirmed that he was not forced or coerced to plead guilty, he was doing so freely and voluntarily, and he had discussed his decision with his counsel. The remaining arguments have been considered and are unpersuasive.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
MALONE JR., STEIN, McCARTHY and GARRY, JJ., concur.