From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Havers

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Feb 10, 2012
92 A.D.3d 1228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-02-10

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jeffrey A. HAVERS, Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered June 8, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree.James L. Dowsey, III, Ellicottville (Keliann M. Elniski of Counsel), for defendant-appellant. Lori Pettit Rieman, District Attorney, Little Valley, for respondent.


Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered June 8, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree.James L. Dowsey, III, Ellicottville (Keliann M. Elniski of Counsel), for defendant-appellant. Lori Pettit Rieman, District Attorney, Little Valley, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65 [3] ). Although defendant's contention that his plea was not voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently entered survives his valid waiver of the right *909 to appeal, defendant failed to move to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction and thus failed to preserve that contention for our review ( see People v. Zulian, 68 A.D.3d 1731, 891 N.Y.S.2d 821, lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 894, 903 N.Y.S.2d 783, 929 N.E.2d 1018). We reject defendant's contention that this is one of those rare cases in which the exception to the preservation requirement applies ( see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5). Defendant's further contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel does not survive his guilty plea or his valid waiver of the right to appeal inasmuch as defendant “failed to demonstrate that ‘the plea bargaining process was infected by [the] allegedly ineffective assistance or that defendant entered the plea because of his attorney['s] allegedly poor performance’ ” ( People v. Wright, 66 A.D.3d 1334, 885 N.Y.S.2d 794, lv. denied 13 N.Y.3d 912, 895 N.Y.S.2d 326, 922 N.E.2d 915). Finally, to the extent that defendant challenges County Court's suppression ruling following the Huntley hearing, his valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses that ruling ( see People v. Kemp, 94 N.Y.2d 831, 833, 703 N.Y.S.2d 59, 724 N.E.2d 754; People v. Gilbert, 17 A.D.3d 1164, 793 N.Y.S.2d 847, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 762, 801 N.Y.S.2d 257, 834 N.E.2d 1267).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, and MARTOCHE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Havers

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Feb 10, 2012
92 A.D.3d 1228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

People v. Havers

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jeffrey A. HAVERS…

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

Date published: Feb 10, 2012

Citations

92 A.D.3d 1228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1019
937 N.Y.S.2d 908