People v. Ebert

15 A.D.3d 781, 789 N.Y.S.2d 772, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1905
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 24, 2005
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 15 A.D.3d 781 (People v. Ebert) 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. Ebert, 15 A.D.3d 781, 789 N.Y.S.2d 772, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Greene County (Pulver, Jr., J.), rendered December 3, 2002, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal contempt in the first degree.

Defendant was charged in a one-count indictment with criminal contempt in the first degree for violating an order of protection on February 13, 2002 and February 16, 2002. Defendant [782]*782entered an Alford plea to the charged crime, waived her right to appeal and was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to participation in an in-house treatment program and five years’ probation. Defendant now appeals.

Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that County Court erred in accepting her Alford plea inasmuch as there is insufficient evidence of defendant’s actual guilt. Although defendant’s claim survives the waiver of the right to appeal “to the extent that it involves the voluntariness of the plea” itself (People v Sandlin, 282 AD2d 833, 833 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 834 [2001]; see People v Berry, 285 AD2d 672 [2001]), defendant’s challenge to the validity of the plea is nevertheless unpreserved for our review due to her failure to move to withdraw the plea or vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]; People v Grier, 11 AD3d 816 [2004]; People v Perry, 4 AD3d 618 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 804 [2004]). In any event, were we to reach the merits, we would find that the Alford plea represented an intelligent and voluntary choice on behalf of defendant given the alternatives and that the information considered by County Court, including the grand jury minutes, provide strong record evidence of defendant’s guilt (see People v Stewart, 307 AD2d 533, 534 [2003]).

Cardona, EJ., Mercure, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

People v. Retell
179 N.Y.S.3d 462 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Tadd
2017 NY Slip Op 7011 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
ELLIOTT, SHAUN K., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013
People v. Elliott
107 A.D.3d 1466 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Fallen
106 A.D.3d 1118 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Dash
74 A.D.3d 1859 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Hinkle
56 A.D.2d 1210 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
People v. Washington
51 A.D.3d 1223 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
People v. Matthie
34 A.D.3d 987 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Dille
21 A.D.3d 1298 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 A.D.3d 781, 789 N.Y.S.2d 772, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ebert-nyappdiv-2005.