From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Bridgers

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Mar 7, 2018
159 A.D.3d 715 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

2016–08936 Ind. No. 804/16

03-07-2018

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Eric BRIDGERS, appellant.

Jillian S. Harrington, Staten Island, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Donald Berk and Brian Witthuhn of counsel), for respondent.


Jillian S. Harrington, Staten Island, NY, for appellant.

Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Donald Berk and Brian Witthuhn of counsel), for respondent.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Patricia A. Harrington, J.), rendered August 3, 2016, convicting him of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the second degree, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the third degree, and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol as a misdemeanor, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was involuntary, unknowing, and not intelligently entered is unpreserved for appellate review, since he failed to move to withdraw the plea before sentencing (see People v. Tissiera, 138 A.D.3d 1040, 29 N.Y.S.3d 550 ; People v. Pryor, 11 A.D.3d 565, 782 N.Y.S.2d 803 ). In any event, the plea was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered (see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646 ; People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 ; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 17, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170 ). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's comments regarding his possible sentence exposure were he to proceed to trial were informative, not coercive (see People v. Tavares, 103 A.D.3d 820, 820, 962 N.Y.S.2d 196 ; see also People v. Licausi, 122 A.D.3d 771, 773, 996 N.Y.S.2d 188 ).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Bridgers

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Mar 7, 2018
159 A.D.3d 715 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

People v. Bridgers

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Eric BRIDGERS, appellant.

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

Date published: Mar 7, 2018

Citations

159 A.D.3d 715 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
69 N.Y.S.3d 497

Citing Cases

People v. Shabazz

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was involuntary…

People v. Peralta

The defendant contends that his plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. However, the defendant…