Opinion
2011-10-4
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,v.Claudio MARINO–AFFAITATI, appellant.
Franzblau Dratch, New York, N.Y. (Stephen N. Dratch of counsel), for appellant.William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered October 21, 2008, convicting him of conspiracy in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The record reflects that the defendant's plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent ( see People v. Seeber, 4 N.Y.3d 780, 793 N.Y.S.2d 826, 826 N.E.2d 797; People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646; People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5). His contention that the allocution was insufficient because the County Court failed to ascertain his intent to cause serious physical injury is without merit ( see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646).
To the extent the defendant contends that his counsel provided ineffective assistance for failing to inform him of a potential entrapment defense, this contention involves matter dehors the record and is not reviewable on direct appeal ( see People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709, 530 N.Y.S.2d 52, 525 N.E.2d 698; People v. Redmon, 81 A.D.3d 752, 917 N.Y.S.2d 229; People v. Johnson, 59 A.D.3d 738, 875 N.Y.S.2d 112). To the extent this contention is reviewable on the record before us, the defendant's plea allocution, in which he admitted that he had “made arrangements” with an individual to injure the defendant's wife, demonstrates the absence of inducement or encouragement to commit the crime, a necessary element of an entrapment defense ( see Penal Law §§ 25.00, 40.05; People v. Brown, 82 N.Y.2d 869, 871, 609 N.Y.S.2d 164, 631 N.E.2d 106).
DILLON, J.P., ENG, SGROI and MILLER, JJ., concur.