Opinion
03-27-2015
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David W. ROBERTS, Defendant–Appellant.
Erickson Webb Scolton & Hajdu, Lakewood (Lyle T. Hajdu of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Donald G. O'Geen, District Attorney, Warsaw (Vincent A. Hemming of Counsel), for Respondent.
Erickson Webb Scolton & Hajdu, Lakewood (Lyle T. Hajdu of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
Donald G. O'Geen, District Attorney, Warsaw (Vincent A. Hemming of Counsel), for Respondent.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.75[1][b] ). We reject defendant's contention that County Court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw the guilty plea (see People v. Said, 105 A.D.3d 1392, 1393, 963 N.Y.S.2d 796, lv. denied 21 N.Y.3d 1019, 971 N.Y.S.2d 501, 994 N.E.2d 397 ). “[D]efendant's conclusory and unsubstantiated claim of innocence is belied by his admissions during the plea colloquy” (People v. Garner, 86 A.D.3d 955, 955, 926 N.Y.S.2d 796 ). Contrary to defendant's further contentions, his fear of an unfair trial or the imposition of a longer sentence after trial do not constitute coercion (see generally People v. Jackson, 90 A.D.3d 1692, 1693, 936 N.Y.S.2d 462, lv. denied 18 N.Y.3d 958, 944 N.Y.S.2d 487, 967 N.E.2d 712 ; People v. Dumpson, 238 A.D.2d 802, 803, 656 N.Y.S.2d 515, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 892, 662 N.Y.S.2d 435, 685 N.E.2d 216 ; People v. Patrick, 163 A.D.2d 84, 84, 557 N.Y.S.2d 341, lv. denied 76 N.Y.2d 895, 561 N.Y.S.2d 558, 562 N.E.2d 883 ).
Defendant's contention that the court's redaction of the presentence report (PSI) was inadequate is unpreserved for our review inasmuch as he did not raise the issue before the sentencing court (see generally People v. Gibbons, 101 A.D.3d 1615, 1616, 956 N.Y.S.2d 720 ). In any event, although the words in the paragraph that the court redacted remain visible, it is evident from the court's notation thereon that the paragraph was redacted and that the material is not available for use against defendant (cf. People v. Howard, 124 A.D.3d 1350, 1351, 998 N.Y.S.2d 755 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
SCUDDER, P.J., LINDLEY, VALENTINO, and DeJOSEPH, JJ., concur.