Opinion
2018–08142 Ind. No. 3018/14
05-11-2022
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Lonnie DIGGS, appellant.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Ava C. Page of counsel), for appellant. Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill, William H. Branigan, and Katherine A. Triffon of counsel), for respondent.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Ava C. Page of counsel), for appellant.
Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill, William H. Branigan, and Katherine A. Triffon of counsel), for respondent.
BETSY BARROS, J.P., REINALDO E. RIVERA, CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Steven W. Paynter, J.), rendered June 19, 2018, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant pleaded guilty after a period of 44½ months of pretrial incarceration. The defendant's contention that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Price, 150 A.D.3d 1153, 52 N.Y.S.3d 649 ). In any event, after balancing the five factors identified in ( People v. Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442, 373 N.Y.S.2d 79, 335 N.E.2d 303 ), we conclude that the defendant's contention is without merit. Although the defendant's period of pretrial incarceration, which ran from the date of his arrest through the date of his plea, was significant, approximately half of that delay was on his consent, due to motion practice, or caused by conflicting engagements of his retained counsel, and therefore was supported by good cause (see People v. Waldron, 6 N.Y.3d 463, 469, 814 N.Y.S.2d 70, 847 N.E.2d 367 ; People v. Morales, 171 A.D.3d 945, 948, 98 N.Y.S.3d 121 ; People v. Lowry, 107 A.D.2d 716, 717, 484 N.Y.S.2d 71 ; cf. People v. Wiggins, 31 N.Y.3d 1, 72 N.Y.S.3d 1, 95 N.E.3d 303 ). Furthermore, the defendant did not demonstrate that his defense suffered any specific impairment by the delay, and he ultimately received the benefit of an offer to plead guilty to a lesser included offense (see People v. Wiggins, 31 N.Y.3d at 17–18, 72 N.Y.S.3d 1, 95 N.E.3d 303 ; People v. Waldron, 6 N.Y.3d at 469, 814 N.Y.S.2d 70, 847 N.E.2d 367 ). Finally, the nature of the charges, involving an intentional homicide by means of asphyxiation and blunt trauma to the head, was undoubtedly serious.
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
BARROS, J.P., RIVERA, CHAMBERS and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.