People v. Davis

2020 NY Slip Op 04761, 127 N.Y.S.3d 777, 186 A.D.3d 852
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Davis. Read the opinion of the Court — 155 A.D.3d 1311
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 26, 2020·No. Ind. No. 152/17·Published

Opinion

People v Davis (2020 NY Slip Op 04761)
People v Davis
2020 NY Slip Op 04761
Decided on August 26, 2020
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 August 26, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.
SHERI S. ROMAN
LINDA CHRISTOPHER
PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

2018-04234
(Ind. No. 152/17)

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

v

Jeremy T. Davis, appellant.


Thomas N. N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, NY (Steven Levine of counsel), for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Edward T. McLoughlin, J.), rendered March 19, 2018, convicting him of promoting prostitution in the second degree and criminal sexual act in the second degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

On appeal, the defendant contends that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered into based on record evidence that the County Court misinformed him regarding the maximum enhanced sentence he could have received had he violated his plea agreement prior to sentencing. Because the defendant did not move to withdraw his plea on this ground, his contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v Leasure, 177 AD3d 770, 772; People v Odom, 164 AD3d 1475, 1476; People v Gabbidon, 134 AD3d 736, 736). Moreover, considering that the defendant did not violate his plea agreement and, consequently, did not receive an enhanced sentence, we decline to review this unpreserved contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

CHAMBERS, J.P., ROMAN, CHRISTOPHER and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

People v. Davis, 2020 NY Slip Op 04761, 127 N.Y.S.3d 777, 186 A.D.3d 852 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

2020 NY Slip Op 04761 (People v. Davis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Gabbidon
134 A.D.3d 736 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)