Opinion
12-16-2015
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Kevin WASHINGTON, appellant.
Patrick Michael Megaro, Bay Shore, N.Y., for appellant. Madeline Singas, Acting District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Jacqueline Rosenblum and Rebecca L. Abensur of counsel), for respondent.
Patrick Michael Megaro, Bay Shore, N.Y., for appellant.Madeline Singas, Acting District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Jacqueline Rosenblum and Rebecca L. Abensur of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered April 24, 2014, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (four counts) and petit larceny, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing and voluntary because the plea court failed to inquire into his mental capacity at the time of the plea allocution is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Pelaez, 100 A.D.3d 803, 804, 954 N.Y.S.2d 554 ; People v. Perez, 65 A.D.3d 1167, 885 N.Y.S.2d 127 ; People v. Godfrey, 33 A.D.3d 623, 822 N.Y.S.2d 135 ). In any event, nothing in the record indicates a need for the plea court to have conducted a full inquiry into the defendant's mental health before accepting his plea of guilty (see People v. DeBenedetto, 120 A.D.3d 1428, 1429, 992 N.Y.S.2d 370 ; People v. Godfrey, 33 A.D.3d at 624, 822 N.Y.S.2d 135 ; People v. Phillips, 243 A.D.2d 514, 515, 663 N.Y.S.2d 90 ). Upon examination six weeks earlier by a psychiatrist and a psychologist, the defendant had been found fit to proceed in the criminal action, and the defendant's demeanor at the plea allocution and responses to the plea court's inquiries were appropriate (see People v. DeBenedetto, 120 A.D.3d at 1429, 992 N.Y.S.2d 370 ; People v. Godfrey, 33 A.D.3d at 624, 822 N.Y.S.2d 135 ; People v. Phillips, 243 A.D.2d at 515, 663 N.Y.S.2d 90 ; People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211 ).
Contrary to the defendant's further contention, after his comments at the sentencing proceeding raised the possibility of a defense based upon mental disease or defect, the sentencing court conducted an adequate inquiry to ensure that the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing and voluntary (see generally People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 ; People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, 355, 287 N.Y.S.2d 659, 234 N.E.2d 687 ).
BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, MILLER and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.