MC CREA, CHRISTOPHER, PEOPLE v

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 10, 2016
DocketKA 13-00990
StatusPublished

This text of MC CREA, CHRISTOPHER, PEOPLE v (MC CREA, CHRISTOPHER, PEOPLE v) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
MC CREA, CHRISTOPHER, PEOPLE v, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

483 KA 13-00990 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, DEJOSEPH, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHRISTOPHER MCCREA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MULDOON, GETZ & RESTON, ROCHESTER (GARY MULDOON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

DONALD G. O’GEEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WARSAW (VINCENT A. HEMMING OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Wyoming County Court (Michael F. Griffith, J.), rendered April 3, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of perjury in the first degree.

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 perjury in the first degree (Penal Law § 210.15). We reject defendant’s contention that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256). “County Court expressly ascertained from defendant that, as a condition of the plea, he was agreeing to waive his right to appeal, and the court did not conflate that right with those automatically forfeited by a guilty plea” (People v Thompson, 83 AD3d 1535, 1535 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Villar, 115 AD3d 1361, 1361, lv denied 23 NY3d 1044). Defendant’s challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution is encompassed by his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Oberdorf, 136 AD3d 1291, 1292; People v Rosado, 70 AD3d 1315, 1316, lv denied 14 NY3d 892). In any event, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review because he did not move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction on that ground (see Oberdorf, 136 AD3d at 1292; People v Wackwitz, 93 AD3d 1220, 1221, lv denied 19 NY3d 868).

Entered: June 10, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Rosado
70 A.D.3d 1315 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Thompson
83 A.D.3d 1535 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Wackwitz
93 A.D.3d 1220 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Villar
115 A.D.3d 1361 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Oberdorf
136 A.D.3d 1291 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
MC CREA, CHRISTOPHER, PEOPLE v, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mc-crea-christopher-people-v-nyappdiv-2016.