Blaming Your Lawyer for a Guilty Plea Needs Admissible Evidence<\/span><\/strong><\/h3>\nPost 5026<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\nSee the full video at https:\/\/rumble.com\/v6qzqsg-it-takes-evidence-to-withdraw-a-guilty-plea.html\u00a0<\/a> and at https:\/\/youtu.be\/HJVmShTxSiQ<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/zalma.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/WITHDRAWGUILTY.png?resize=640%2C360\")
In United States Of America v. Glenn Griffin,<\/em> No. 22 CR 390-1 (VB), United States District Court, S.D. New York (March 13, 2025)\u00a0Glenn Griffin sought to withdraw the guilty plea he entered on August 26, 2024. During a change of plea hearing before Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik, Griffin pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud that he wishes to change when he found out\u00a0 the potential sentence.<\/p>\nGRIFFIN\u2019S ARGUMENTS TO WITHDRAW PLEA<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\nGlenn Griffin made two key arguments in his motion to withdraw his guilty plea:<\/p>\n
\n- Improper Pressure from Counsel<\/strong>: Griffin argued that his plea was not knowing and voluntary because his prior counsel, Stephen J. McCarthy, Jr., Esq., improperly pressured him to plead guilty.<\/li>\n
- Intervening Developments<\/strong>:<\/strong> Griffin maintained that intervening developments since the plea hearing revealed the government\u2019s case to be substantially weaker than he was initially led to believe by McCarthy.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
FACTUAL BACKGROUND<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\nGriffin was arrested on July 21, 2022, on an indictment that included charges of bribery and wire fraud, among others. He was accused of conspiring with Robert Dyckman, an employee of the Town of Cortlandt, New York, to allow unauthorized dumping at a town facility in exchange for bribes. Additionally, Griffin was involved in a bid-rigging scheme to defraud municipalities.<\/p>\n
THE PLEA COLLOQUY<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\nThe colloquy turned when the magistrate judge asked Griffin to say in his own words \u201cwhat you did to commit these crimes.\u201d Griffin responded by partially admitting to some of the charged conduct; he acknowledged that he \u201cgave Bobby Dyckman a couple hundred bucks a few times around the holidays as . . . [a] gratuity,\u201d and said that, \u201cas far as the bids . . . I did ask people over time to help me just because I was-I had relationships with people, and I did ask other people to put in some bids,\u201d but asserted that he \u201cdidn\u2019t do it with all the ones that they said.\u201d<\/p>\n
When Judge Reznik asked if Griffin had agreed to an illegal dumping scheme, he responded, \u201cNo.\u201d\u00a0 But later\u00a0 he responded: \u201cIn-for just to make this easier on everybody, yes, Your Honor. But it was . . . if it was a few hundred dollars a couple of times, and I had permission for years and years and years.\u201d<\/p>\n
Griffin\u2019s sworn testimony during the plea colloquy carried a strong presumption of accuracy and that his later contradictory statements were found by the court to not be sufficient grounds to withdraw the plea. The court also found that Griffin\u2019s counsel had provided an honest assessment of the case and that Griffin had ample opportunity to discuss the plea agreement with his counsel.<\/p>\n
ANALYSIS<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\nThe voluntariness of Griffin\u2019s guilty plea was the dispositive issue presented to the District Court.<\/p>\n
The Court concluded that Griffin voluntarily pleaded guilty. When a Court rejects a defendant\u2019s claim of involuntariness that finding alone is sufficient to reject the defendant\u2019s motion to withdraw his guilty plea.<\/p>\n
Griffin testified that, on August 26, Mr. McCarthy encouraged him to plead guilty but made clear that the choice was Griffin\u2019s alone. Not only does Griffin\u2019s testimony undermine his claim that Mr. McCarthy coerced him to plead guilty, but it reinforces the presumption of verity attached to the statements he made during the plea colloquy.<\/p>\n
Griffin failed to meet his burden and Griffin\u2019s motion to withdraw his guilty plea was denied. Griffin\u2019s sentencing will proceed on April 22, 2025, at 10:00 a.m.<\/p>\n
Plea bargains exist to save the time of the prosecution and the court when the defendant agrees that the facts against him are sufficient to find him guilty by a jury and a lesser sentence that he would have received if found guilty by a jury. Second thoughts about his guilt is insufficient to allow a person who voluntarily pleaded guilty to withdraw his plea. He will be sentenced in April and will spend time in the gray bar hotel.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/zalma.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/BZTHEA.png?resize=300%2C282\")
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.<\/p>\n
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.<\/p>\n
Subscribe to my substack at https:\/\/barryzalma.substack.com\/subscribe<\/a><\/p>\nGo to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https:\/\/www.newsbreak.com\/@c\/1653419?s=01;<\/a> Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https:\/\/rumble.com\/account\/content?type=all;<\/a> Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg<\/a><\/p>\nGo to the Insurance Claims Library \u2013 https:\/\/lnkd.in\/gwEYk<\/a><\/p>\n\nLike this:<\/h3>\n
See the full video at https:\/\/rumble.com\/v6qzqsg-it-takes-evidence-to-withdraw-a-guilty-plea.html\u00a0<\/a> and at https:\/\/youtu.be\/HJVmShTxSiQ<\/a><\/p>\n Glenn Griffin made two key arguments in his motion to withdraw his guilty plea:<\/p>\n Griffin was arrested on July 21, 2022, on an indictment that included charges of bribery and wire fraud, among others. He was accused of conspiring with Robert Dyckman, an employee of the Town of Cortlandt, New York, to allow unauthorized dumping at a town facility in exchange for bribes. Additionally, Griffin was involved in a bid-rigging scheme to defraud municipalities.<\/p>\n The colloquy turned when the magistrate judge asked Griffin to say in his own words \u201cwhat you did to commit these crimes.\u201d Griffin responded by partially admitting to some of the charged conduct; he acknowledged that he \u201cgave Bobby Dyckman a couple hundred bucks a few times around the holidays as . . . [a] gratuity,\u201d and said that, \u201cas far as the bids . . . I did ask people over time to help me just because I was-I had relationships with people, and I did ask other people to put in some bids,\u201d but asserted that he \u201cdidn\u2019t do it with all the ones that they said.\u201d<\/p>\n When Judge Reznik asked if Griffin had agreed to an illegal dumping scheme, he responded, \u201cNo.\u201d\u00a0 But later\u00a0 he responded: \u201cIn-for just to make this easier on everybody, yes, Your Honor. But it was . . . if it was a few hundred dollars a couple of times, and I had permission for years and years and years.\u201d<\/p>\n Griffin\u2019s sworn testimony during the plea colloquy carried a strong presumption of accuracy and that his later contradictory statements were found by the court to not be sufficient grounds to withdraw the plea. The court also found that Griffin\u2019s counsel had provided an honest assessment of the case and that Griffin had ample opportunity to discuss the plea agreement with his counsel.<\/p>\n The voluntariness of Griffin\u2019s guilty plea was the dispositive issue presented to the District Court.<\/p>\n The Court concluded that Griffin voluntarily pleaded guilty. When a Court rejects a defendant\u2019s claim of involuntariness that finding alone is sufficient to reject the defendant\u2019s motion to withdraw his guilty plea.<\/p>\n Griffin testified that, on August 26, Mr. McCarthy encouraged him to plead guilty but made clear that the choice was Griffin\u2019s alone. Not only does Griffin\u2019s testimony undermine his claim that Mr. McCarthy coerced him to plead guilty, but it reinforces the presumption of verity attached to the statements he made during the plea colloquy.<\/p>\n Griffin failed to meet his burden and Griffin\u2019s motion to withdraw his guilty plea was denied. Griffin\u2019s sentencing will proceed on April 22, 2025, at 10:00 a.m.<\/p>\n Plea bargains exist to save the time of the prosecution and the court when the defendant agrees that the facts against him are sufficient to find him guilty by a jury and a lesser sentence that he would have received if found guilty by a jury. Second thoughts about his guilt is insufficient to allow a person who voluntarily pleaded guilty to withdraw his plea. He will be sentenced in April and will spend time in the gray bar hotel.<\/p>\n Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.<\/p>\n Subscribe to my substack at https:\/\/barryzalma.substack.com\/subscribe<\/a><\/p>\n Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https:\/\/www.newsbreak.com\/@c\/1653419?s=01;<\/a> Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https:\/\/rumble.com\/account\/content?type=all;<\/a> Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg<\/a><\/p>\n Go to the Insurance Claims Library \u2013 https:\/\/lnkd.in\/gwEYk<\/a><\/p>\nIn United States Of America v. Glenn Griffin,<\/em> No. 22 CR 390-1 (VB), United States District Court, S.D. New York (March 13, 2025)\u00a0Glenn Griffin sought to withdraw the guilty plea he entered on August 26, 2024. During a change of plea hearing before Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik, Griffin pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud that he wishes to change when he found out\u00a0 the potential sentence.<\/p>\nGRIFFIN\u2019S ARGUMENTS TO WITHDRAW PLEA<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n
FACTUAL BACKGROUND<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n
THE PLEA COLLOQUY<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n
ANALYSIS<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.<\/p>\nLike this:<\/h3>\n