Opinion
No. 102 KA 22-00170
02-10-2023
ROSEMARIE RICHARDS, GILBERTSVILLE, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
ROSEMARIE RICHARDS, GILBERTSVILLE, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., LINDLEY, BANNISTER, MONTOUR, AND OGDEN, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the Steuben County Court (Patrick F. McAllister, A.J.), rendered October 19, 2021. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.06 [1]), defendant contends that his plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent based on an alleged Brad y violation (see generally Brady v Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 [1963]). Defendant's contention involves matters outside the record on appeal and must therefore be raised by way of a motion pursuant to CPL article 440 (see People v Jefferson, 125 A.D.3d 1463, 1464-1465 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 990 [2015]; People v DeJesus, 110 A.D.3d 1480, 1482 [4th Dept 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 1155 [2014]; People v Ellis, 73 A.D.3d 1433, 1434 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 N.Y.3d 851 [2010]).