Opinion
03-22-2024
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Michael J. LACEY, Defendant-Appellant.
LEANNE LAPP, PUBLIC DEFENDER, CANANDAIGUA (BRADLEY E. KEEM OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. JAMES B. RITTS, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (V. CHRISTOPHER EAGGLESTON OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Brian D. Dennis, J.), rendered December 6, 2022. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of identity theft in the first degree (two counts), identity theft in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree (three counts).
LEANNE LAPP, PUBLIC DEFENDER, CANANDAIGUA (BRADLEY E. KEEM OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JAMES B. RITTS, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (V. CHRISTOPHER EAGGLESTON OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. PRESENT: LINDLEY, J.P., CURRAN, BANNISTER, GREENWOOD, AND NOWAK, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of two counts of identity theft in the first degree (Penal Law § 190.80 [1]), one count of identity theft in the second degree (§ 190.79 [1]), and three counts of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree (§ 165.45 [2]). By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his challenge to County Court’s Molineux ruling (see People v. Johnson, 195 A.D.3d 1420, 1421, 150 N.Y.S.3d 424 [4th Dept. 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 1146, 159 N.Y.S.3d 336, 346, 180 N.E.3d 500, 510 [2021]; People v. Pierce, 142 A.D.3d 1341, 1341, 38 N.Y.S.3d 460 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 1149, 52 N.Y.S.3d 301, 74 N.E.3d 686 [2017]; People v. Johnson, 104 A.D.8d 705, 706, 960 N.Y.S.2d 206 [2d Dept. 2013]). Defendant further contends that the guilty plea was improperly entered because he gave monosyllabic, perfunctory responses to the court’s questions during the plea colloquy and because statements he made at sentencing negated his guilt and thus warranted further inquiry by the court. That contention is not preserved for our review inasmuch as defendant did not move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v. Brown, 204 A.D.3d 1519, 1519, 167 N.Y.S.3d 293 [4th Dept. 2022], lv denied 38 N.Y.3d 1069, 171 N.Y.S.3d 456, 457, 191 N.E.3d 408, 409 [2022]; People v. Brinson, 192 A.D.3d 1559, 1559-1560, 143 N.Y.S.3d 489 [4th Dept. 2021]; People v. Rathburn, 178 A.D.3d 1421, 1421, 112 N.Y,S.3d 654 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 944, 124 N.Y.S.3d 282, 147 N.E.3d 552 [2020]). In any event, a defendant’s monosyllabic responses to a court’s questions do not render a plea invalid (see People v. Adams, 201 A.D.3d 1311, 1313, 161 N.Y.S.3d 613 [4th Dept. 2022], lv denied 38 N.Y.3d 1007, 168 N.Y.S.3d 357, 188 N.E.3d 549 [2022]; Brinson, 192 A.D.3d at 1560, 143 N.Y.S.3d 489; Rathburn, 178 A.D.3d at 1421-1422, 112 N.Y.S.3d 654). With respect to the statements defendant made at sentencing, we note that "a trial court has no duty, in the absence of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, to conduct a further inquiry concerning the plea’s voluntariness ‘based upon comments made by [the] defendant during … sentencing’ " (Brown, 204 A.D.3d at 1519, 167 N.Y.S.3d 293; see People v. Mobayed, 158 A.D.3d 1221, 1223, 70 N.Y.S.3d 267 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1015, 78 N.Y.S.3d 285, 102 N.E.3d 1066 [2018]). Moreover, defendant said nothing at sentencing that called into doubt the voluntariness of his plea (see generally People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 [1988]).
Finally, we reject defendant’s contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe.