People v. Faircloth
This text of People v. Faircloth (People v. Faircloth) 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.
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
People v Faircloth
2026 NY Slip Op 03977
June 24, 2026
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
The People of the State of New York, respondent,
v
Messiah Faircloth, appellant.
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Decided on June 24, 2026
2022-05453, (Ind. No. 18/21)
Cheryl E. Chambers, J.P.
Linda Christopher
Carl J. Landicino
Phillip Hom, JJ.
Kelley M. Enderley, Poughkeepsie, NY, for appellant.
Anthony P. Parisi, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Anna K. Diehn of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Edward T. McLoughlin, J.), rendered June 15, 2022, convicting him of attempted assault in the first degree, 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 is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or otherwise raise the issue in the County Court (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665; People v Escobargarcia, 237 AD3d 1221, 1222). Moreover, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the defendant's allocution did not cast significant doubt on his guilt as to the crime to which he pleaded, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of his plea (see People v Bermudez-Cedillos, 228 AD3d 681, 682). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Ramsay, 248 AD3d 1141; People v Escobargarcia, 237 AD3d at 1222).
CHAMBERS, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, LANDICINO and HOM, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
People v. Faircloth, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-faircloth-nyappdiv-2026.