Opinion
No. 2021-09030 S.C.I. No. 70439/21
01-31-2024
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Christopher Anderson, appellant.
Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, NY, for appellant. Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Shiry Gaash and Glenn Green of counsel), for respondent.
Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, NY, for appellant.
Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Shiry Gaash and Glenn Green of counsel), for respondent.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P., LINDA CHRISTOPHER, WILLIAM G. FORD, JANICE A. TAYLOR, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (John B. Collins, J.), rendered November 10, 2021, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, 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 knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to withdraw his plea or otherwise raise that issue before the County Court prior to the imposition of sentence (see People v Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665; People v Defilippis, 210 A.D.3d 1004, 1004). Moreover, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the defendant's allocution did not cast significant doubt on his guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of his plea (see generally People v McNair, 13 N.Y.3d 821, 822-823; People v Steele, 197 A.D.3d 512, 513). In any event, the record shows that the defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered (see People v Pil-Yong Yoo, 208 A.D.3d 1257, 1258; People v Keller, 201 A.D.3d 657, 657; see also People v Hatcher, 211 A.D.3d 1236, 1238).
The defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is without merit (see People v Rodriguez, 194 A.D.3d 1078, 1079; People v Mills, 181 A.D.3d 718, 719).
The defendant's contention that this Court should exercise its interest of justice jurisdiction to reduce the sentence is precluded by his waiver of the right to appeal, which he does not challenge (see People v Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 255; People v Yakubov, 204 A.D.3d 1043, 1044).
DUFFY, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, FORD and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.