People v. Constantine

201 N.Y.S.3d 682, 223 A.D.3d 839, 2024 NY Slip Op 00325
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 24, 2024
DocketInd. No. 92/21
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 201 N.Y.S.3d 682 (People v. Constantine) 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
People v. Constantine, 201 N.Y.S.3d 682, 223 A.D.3d 839, 2024 NY Slip Op 00325 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

People v Constantine (2024 NY Slip Op 00325)
People v Constantine
2024 NY Slip Op 00325
Decided on January 24, 2024
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on January 24, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
LARA J. GENOVESI
HELEN VOUTSINAS
JANICE A. TAYLOR, JJ.

2021-09029
(Ind. No. 92/21)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Dijion Constantine, appellant.


Christopher E. Gurda, Middletown, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Hyun Chin Kim, J.), rendered November 15, 2021, convicting him of criminal possession of a firearm, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent because the sentencing promise was not adequately explained to him at the plea proceeding is unpreserved for appellate review, as he did not move to withdraw his plea on this ground or otherwise raise this issue before the County Court (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v Abbott, 203 AD3d 840). Furthermore, contrary to the defendant's contention, since the sentencing promise was repeated on the record at the outset of the sentencing proceeding, giving the defendant ample opportunity to object prior to the imposition of the sentence if it did not comport with his understanding of the promise, preservation was required (see People v Bush, 38 NY3d 66, 71). In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit, as the record reveals that the sentencing promise was clearly and adequately explained to the defendant during the plea allocution before the court accepted his plea of guilty (see People v Abbott, 203 AD3d 840).

IANNACCI, J.P., GENOVESI, VOUTSINAS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Acting Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Barnwell
2026 NY Slip Op 00255 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026)
People v. Lowe
2025 NY Slip Op 05257 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Dominguez
2025 NY Slip Op 05249 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Montano
2025 NY Slip Op 01110 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Sobers
2025 NY Slip Op 00992 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Brazeal
2025 NY Slip Op 00976 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Waiters
2024 NY Slip Op 06365 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Sarasty
2024 NY Slip Op 03500 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
201 N.Y.S.3d 682, 223 A.D.3d 839, 2024 NY Slip Op 00325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-constantine-nyappdiv-2024.