§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Appellant,v.Anthony Griffin, Respondent.

Brief

40 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Harris

    61 N.Y.2d 9 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 1,659 times
    In People v Harris (61 N.Y.2d 9), within the context of determining whether a guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered, the Court of Appeals concluded that no mandatory catechism was required.

  2. U.S. v. Moussaoui

    591 F.3d 263 (4th Cir. 2010)   Cited 467 times
    Holding a defendant’s guilty plea foreclosed his Faretta challenge

  3. People v. Hansen

    95 N.Y.2d 227 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 444 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, by pleading guilty, the defendant had forfeited his right to challenge the prosecutor's submission of hearsay evidence to the grand jury

  4. People v. Frederick

    45 N.Y.2d 520 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 531 times
    In People v. Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520, 410 N.Y.S.2d 555, 382 N.E.2d 1332 (1978), the trial court informed the defendant at the plea allocution that no promises were being made concerning the sentence to be imposed.

  5. People v. Brown

    2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 1376 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 204 times

    No. 28. Argued January 14, 2010. Decided February 18, 2010. APPEAL, by permission of an Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, entered February 6, 2009. The Appellate Division affirmed a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Alex R. Renzi, J.), which had convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree. People v Brown, 59 AD3d 937, reversed

  6. People v. Moissett

    76 N.Y.2d 909 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 300 times

    Argued September 7, 1990 Decided October 16, 1990 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, Eugene M. Hanofee, J. John Ferrara and Carl Silverstein for appellant. Stephen F. Lungen, District Attorney (Bonnie M. Mitzner of counsel), for respondent. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. We conclude that there is support in the record for the Appellate Division's determination that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently

  7. People v. Tinsley

    35 N.Y.2d 926 (N.Y. 1974)   Cited 463 times
    In People v Tinsley (35 N.Y.2d 926, 927), it was held that the nature and extent of the fact-finding procedures prerequisite to the disposition of an application to withdraw a plea of guilty previously entered rest largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the application is made.

  8. People v. Nixon

    21 N.Y.2d 338 (N.Y. 1967)   Cited 531 times
    In People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, 355, 287 N.Y.S.2d 659, 234 N.E.2d 687 (1967), we renounced what we referred to as “the catechism system” for taking guilty pleas.

  9. People v. Sawyer

    57 N.Y.2d 12 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 264 times
    In People v Sawyer (57 N.Y.2d 12, cert denied 459 U.S. 1178, supra), the defendant continually insisted he was incapable of representing himself.

  10. People v. Arroyave

    49 N.Y.2d 264 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 224 times
    In People v Arroyave (49 N.Y.2d 264), the Court of Appeals observed that "[w]hether a continuance should be granted is largely within the discretion of the Trial Judge * * * and the question of whether a defendant has been denied his right to retain counsel of his own choosing can only be answered by examining the particular facts of each case" (People v Arroyave, supra, at 271).