From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Buckley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 11, 1988
139 A.D.2d 589 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

April 11, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed.

We are unpersuaded by the defendant's contention that an evidentiary hearing was necessary to determine his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Under the circumstances the defendant has failed to show that facts dehors the record are material and would entitle him to the relief sought in his CPL 440.10 motion (see, People v. Angelakos, 70 N.Y.2d 670; People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796, 799; cf., People v. Ferreras, 70 N.Y.2d 630; People v. Jenkins, 68 N.Y.2d 896).

The defendant's claim that he was unable to comprehend the proceedings and meaningfully participate in his defense due to his having ingested LSD and antipsychotic medication is unsupported by the record. No substantive basis exists to support a reasonable belief that the defendant was in any way incapacitated at the time in question (see, People v. Gosso, 130 A.D.2d 683, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 712). Furthermore, the court made sufficient inquiry at the time of the plea to determine that he entered into it knowingly and voluntarily (see, People v Fridell, 93 A.D.2d 866). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Buckley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 11, 1988
139 A.D.2d 589 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Buckley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES BUCKLEY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 11, 1988

Citations

139 A.D.2d 589 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

People v. Elliott

We disagree. A court may deny a motion pursuant to CPL article 440 without a hearing if it appears that the…

People v. Vianale

The defendant asserts that he was incapacitated or otherwise unable to comprehend the proceedings wherein he…