Opinion
7 KA 15-01497
02-01-2019
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. JERMAIINE E. POINDEXTER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES A. HOBBS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (LISA GRAY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT:
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES A. HOBBS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (LISA GRAY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Douglas A. Randall, J.), rendered June 16, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]). We reject defendant's contention that the plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered. Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant's statements triggered a duty by County Court to conduct a further inquiry to ensure that the plea was knowing and voluntary (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]), we conclude that the court "properly conducted such an inquiry and that defendant's responses to the court's subsequent questions removed [any] doubt about [his] guilt" (People v Vogt, 150 AD3d 1704, 1705 [4th Dept 2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Defendant's remaining contention that the court abdicated its sentencing discretion to the People is without merit. The court never indicated that it was bound by the People's sentence promise (cf. People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305 [1981]; People v Dupont, 164 AD3d 1649, 1650 [4th Dept 2018]).
Entered: February 1, 2019
Mark W. Bennett
Clerk of the Court