From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Adamson

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 18, 2017
149 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

04-18-2017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Caroline ADAMSON, Defendant–Appellant.

Richard M. Greenberg, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Julie Holt of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Andrew E. Seewald of counsel), for respondent.


Richard M. Greenberg, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Julie Holt of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Andrew E. Seewald of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered June 26, 2012, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of conspiracy in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing her to an aggregate term of 5 to 15 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of her plea does not come within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665–666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 [1988] ), and we decline to review this unpreserved claim in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. Defendant's plea allocution establishes the voluntariness of the plea and contains nothing that casts any doubt on defendant's guilt (see People v. Toxey, 86 N.Y.2d 725, 631 N.Y.S.2d 119, 655 N.E.2d 160 [1995] ). To the extent defendant made a remark that warranted further inquiry by the court, the court's inquiry was sufficient to establish that defendant understood the charges and admitted her guilt. To the extent defendant asserts that motion practice involving other defendants in the same case affected the validity of her plea, that claim is likewise unpreserved and unavailing.

Defendant made a valid waiver of her right to appeal (see People v. Bryant, 28 N.Y.3d 1094, 45 N.Y.S.3d 335, 68 N.E.3d 60 [2016] ), which forecloses review of her excessive sentence claim. Regardless of whether defendant validly waived her right to appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

SWEENY, J.P., RICHTER, ANDRIAS, WEBBER, GESMER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Adamson

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 18, 2017
149 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Adamson

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Caroline ADAMSON…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 18, 2017

Citations

149 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
149 A.D.3d 534
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 2921

Citing Cases

People v. Minaya-Rodriguez

While defendant made a number of comments suggesting that he did not know that the package he was carrying…

People v. Minaya-Rodriguez

While defendant made a number of comments suggesting that he did not know that the package he was carrying…