Opinion
May 30, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty is addressed to the sound discretion of the court (CPL 220.60; People v Stubbs, 110 A.D.2d 725), and "[o]nly in the rare instance will a defendant be entitled to an evidentiary hearing" (People v Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926, 927). The record shows that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty in the presence of competent counsel and after having been fully advised of his rights by the court (see, People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9). Insofar as the court had the defendant's written motion papers before it, and the defendant was given an ample opportunity to advance his claims, the court did not err in denying the motion without a hearing (see, People v Brown, 142 A.D.2d 683).
The defendant's assertion of an alleged off-the-record statement by his attorney that he would get him "two to four" is not binding on the court (see, People v [Joseph] Williams, 120 A.D.2d 693; see also, People v Ramos, 63 N.Y.2d 640). Moreover, any claim that the interpreter's translation was inaccurate is completely belied by the record (see, People v Torres, 96 A.D.2d 604). The defendant herein was familiar with the criminal justice system, having previously been convicted of a felony on the basis of a guilty plea (see, People v Howard, 138 A.D.2d 525), and may not now attempt to renegotiate his plea (see, People v Morris, 118 A.D.2d 595, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 947; see also, People v De Simone, 112 A.D.2d 443). Thompson, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.