Opinion
No. 2019-01162
03-29-2023
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Daniel C. (Anonymous), appellant. (S.C.I. No. 1055/14)
The Cassar Law Firm, P.C., Huntington, NY (Christopher J. Cassar of counsel), for appellant. Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Edward A. Bannan and Marion Tang of counsel), for respondent.
The Cassar Law Firm, P.C., Huntington, NY (Christopher J. Cassar of counsel), for appellant.
Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Edward A. Bannan and Marion Tang of counsel), for respondent.
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P., REINALDO E. RIVERA, PAUL WOOTEN, HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (William J. Condon, J.), rendered November 26, 2018, adjudicating him a youthful offender, upon his plea of guilty to attempted robbery in the second degree, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
"'The defendant's challenge to the validity of his waiver of indictment is not forfeited by his plea of guilty and would not be precluded by any valid waiver of the right to appeal'" (People v Barnhill, 130 A.D.3d 839, 839, quoting People v Yunga, 122 A.D.3d 951, 951; see People v Boston, 75 N.Y.2d 585; People v Sze, 113 A.D.3d 795). Nor does that claim require preservation (see People v Boston, 75 N.Y.2d at 589 n; People v Barnhill, 130 A.D.3d at 839; People v Yunga, 122 A.D.3d at 951). Nevertheless, contrary to the defendant's contention, his waiver of indictment was valid (see NY Const, art I, § 6; CPL 195.10, 195.20; People v Barnhill, 130 A.D.3d 839; People v Bastardo, 127 A.D.3d 776; People v Hanely, 107 A.D.3d 917; People v Newson, 106 A.D.3d 839; People v Gramola, 102 A.D.3d 810).
IANNACCI, J.P., RIVERA, WOOTEN and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.