People v Wilson

Annotate this Case
People v Wilson 2012 NY Slip Op 09094 Decided on December 26, 2012 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 26, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
RUTH C. BALKIN
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.
2012-02299
(Ind. No. 2609/09)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Courtney R. Wilson, appellant.




Christopher J. Cassar, P.C., Huntington, N.Y. (Richard Toseari of
counsel), for appellant.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Marcia R.
Kucera of counsel), for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (J. Doyle, J.), rendered February 22, 2012, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. By order dated February 22, 2012, the County Court stayed execution of the sentence pursuant to CPL 460.50 pending hearing and determination of the appeal.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, the plea is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings on the indictment.

Under the circumstances here, including the confusion regarding to what crime the defendant had pleaded guilty, the County Court improvidently exercised its discretion when it declined to give the defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea (see CPL 220.06[3]; People v Bateman, 278 AD2d 749, 749-750).

In view of the foregoing, we need not consider the defendant's remaining contentions.
DILLON, J.P., BALKIN, CHAMBERS and MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.