Opinion
500 KA 15–00259
06-14-2019
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY S. DAVIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (LEAH R. MERVINE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY S. DAVIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (LEAH R. MERVINE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND WINSLOW, 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 criminal contempt in the first degree after he violated an existing order of protection ( Penal Law § 215.51[b][v] ). On appeal, defendant contends that the order of protection underlying his conviction was a nullity, and thus could not form the basis for his conviction of criminal contempt in the first degree. Defendant's contention regarding the validity of the underlying order of protection does not implicate Supreme Court's jurisdiction and thus does not survive his guilty plea (see People v. Konieczny, 2 N.Y.3d 569, 577, 780 N.Y.S.2d 546, 813 N.E.2d 626 [2004] ; see generally People v. Sampson, 169 A.D.3d 1364, 1364–1365, 91 N.Y.S.3d 747 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 981, 101 N.Y.S.3d 253, 124 N.E.3d 742 [2019] ).