From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 27, 2008
51 A.D.3d 1043 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2007-07191.

May 27, 2008.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered July 17, 2007, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Luke E. Bovill and Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Lifson, J.P., Ritter, Dillon and Leventhal, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea was coerced is unpreserved for appellate review because he did not move to vacate his plea or otherwise raise this issue before the County Court ( see People v Clarke, 93 NY2d 904, 905; People v Scoca, 38 AD3d 801; People v Lopez, 34 AD3d 599; People v Whitaker, 27 AD3d 499). In any event, the defendant acknowledged under oath during the plea proceeding that no one had threatened, coerced, or forced him into pleading guilty, which belies his present unelaborated claim of coercion ( see People v Beasley, 50 AD3d 697; People v Gedin, 46 AD3d 701; People v Lopez, 34 AD3d at 599; People v Robertson, 2 AD3d 756).

The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, except to the extent that the alleged ineffective assistance affected the voluntariness of his plea ( see People v Morrow, 48 AD3d 704; People v Gedin, 46 AD3d 701; People v Dixon, 41 AD3d 861, 862). Although the defendant's allegation that counsel was ineffective because he coerced him into pleading guilty relates to the voluntariness of his plea, it is unsupported by the record which demonstrates that the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made ( see People v Gedin, 46 AD3d at 702).

The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his challenge to the sentence as excessive ( see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 264; People v Morrow, 48 AD3d at 704; People v Luster, 45 AD3d 866).


Summaries of

People v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 27, 2008
51 A.D.3d 1043 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

People v. Perez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MANOLITO PEREZ…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 27, 2008

Citations

51 A.D.3d 1043 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 4891
861 N.Y.S.2d 63

Citing Cases

People v. Johnson

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that his plea was involuntary because…

People v. Wright

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was involuntary because the County Court failed to assign…