Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision affirms the defendant's conviction for attempted assault in the first degree and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol following a guilty plea. The court held that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal, thereby precluding review of his challenges to the suppression hearing and the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution. Additionally, the court found no coercion or ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the plea negotiation and affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion to withdraw the plea.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the appellant's waiver of his right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, thereby precluding appellate review of the suppression determination and the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution.
- Whether the County Court abused its discretion in denying the appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
- Whether the appellant was deprived of effective assistance of counsel in connection with the plea negotiation.
Holdings
- The waiver was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent; therefore, appellate review of the suppression determination and the factual sufficiency of the plea is precluded.
- The County Court exercised its discretion properly and did not err in denying the motion to withdraw.
- The appellant received effective assistance of counsel; the claim of ineffective assistance is unsupported.
Key quotations
“The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal.” (at 1)
“The County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, since the record affirmatively demonstrates that the defendant's plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered.” (at 1)
Factual background
Anthony Colonna pleaded guilty to attempted assault in the first degree and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. He knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal. He later claimed he was coerced, did not understand the plea, and was denied effective assistance of counsel.
Procedural history
The County Court entered a conviction on May 29, 2024 after the appellant pleaded guilty. The appellant waived his right to appeal, moved to withdraw his plea, and raised claims of coercion, lack of understanding, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The Appellate Division reviewed the waiver and the denial of the motion to withdraw and affirmed the judgment.