People v. Johnston

2025 NY Slip Op 03821
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 25, 2025
DocketInd. No. 342/17
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 03821 (People v. Johnston) 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. Johnston, 2025 NY Slip Op 03821 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

People v Johnston (2025 NY Slip Op 03821)
People v Johnston
2025 NY Slip Op 03821
Decided on June 25, 2025
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 June 25, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P.
LINDA CHRISTOPHER
JANICE A. TAYLOR
JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ.

2018-09328
(Ind. No. 342/17)

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

v

Brandyn Johnston, appellant.


Mark Diamond, Pound Ridge, NY, for appellant.

Thomas E. Walsh II, District Attorney, New City, NY (Carrie A. Ciganek of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Sherri Eisenpress, J.), rendered May 15, 2018, convicting him of attempted murder in the second 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, intelligent, and voluntary is unpreserved for appellate review, as he did not move to withdraw his plea or otherwise raise the issue before the County Court (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665; People v Coverdale, 189 AD3d 1610, 1610-1611). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here, as the statements at issue did not cast significant doubt upon his guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of his plea (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d at 666; see also People v Pavone, 26 NY3d 629, 643; People v McKenzie, 19 NY3d 463, 469). In any event, the record establishes that the defendant's plea of guilty was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Goldstein, 12 NY3d 295, 301).

BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, TAYLOR and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Goldstein
907 N.E.2d 692 (New York Court of Appeals, 2009)
The People v. Anthony v. Pavone
47 N.E.3d 56 (New York Court of Appeals, 2015)
People v. Coverdale
2020 NY Slip Op 08075 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. McKenzie
976 N.E.2d 217 (New York Court of Appeals, 2012)
People v. Lopez
525 N.E.2d 5 (New York Court of Appeals, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 NY Slip Op 03821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-johnston-nyappdiv-2025.