Opinion
15-246
01-22-2021
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. JUSTIN C., Defendant-Appellant.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Felicia A. Mennin, J.), rendered September 3, 2014, affirmed.
Defendant did not preserve his challenge to his plea allocution, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice (see People v. Lopez , 71 NY2d 662, 665-666 [1988] ). The narrow exception to the preservation rule is not applicable because nothing in the record cast significant doubt on the knowing or voluntary nature of defendant's guilty plea (see People v. Buie , 128 AD3d 1281 [2015] ; People v. Diaz , 69 Misc 3d 132[A], 2020 NY Slip Op 51210[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2020] ).
As an alternative holding, we find that the plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary. At the plea proceeding, defendant admitted he was guilty of violating New York City Administrative Code § 10-167, stated that he had an opportunity to discuss his case with counsel, and waived specific constitutional rights, including the right to trial, the right to question the People's witnesses and the right to remain silent (see People v. Conceicao , 26 NY3d 375, 383 [2015] ). Defendant also executed a form acknowledging receipt of a written copy of the terms of the conditional discharge and its expiration date (see CPL 410.10[1] ; People v. Valentin , 66 Misc 3d 136[A], 2020 NY Slip Op 50044[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 945 [2020] ) and his contention that the plea was invalid because he was not informed of the requirement of his conditional discharge that he lead a law-abiding life for one year is unavailing (see People v. Rivera , 67 Misc 3d 140[A], 2020 NY Slip Op 50702[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2020], lv denied 36 NY3d 931 [2020] ; People v. Cecilio, 65 Misc 3d 148[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 51829[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2019] ), lv denied 34 NY3d 1127 [2020] ).
All concur