People v. Kelley
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
People v Kelley
2026 NY Slip Op 04569
July 24, 2026
Appellate Division, Fourth 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
ANTON KELLEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
Decided on July 24, 2026
189/25 KA 22-01002
Present: Lindley, J.P., Bannister, Greenwood, And Nowak, JJ.
FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (CASEY S. DUFFY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (DAVID D. BASSETT OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Gordon J. Cuffy, A.J.), rendered June 15, 2022. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree. The judgment was affirmed insofar as appealed from by order of this Court entered June 6, 2025 (239 AD3d 1269), and defendant on September 23, 2025 was granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the order of this Court, and the Court of Appeals on June 18, 2026 reversed the order of this Court and remitted the case to this Court (— NY3d —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904 [2026]).
[*1]Now, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals,
It is hereby ORDERED that, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals, the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: This case is before us upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals (People v Kelley, — NY3d —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904 [2026], revg 239 AD3d 1269 [4th Dept 2025]). We previously affirmed the judgment convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). We concluded, inter alia, that our review of defendant's contention that Supreme Court erred by failing to make an appropriate inquiry into his requests for new counsel as required by People v Sides (75 NY2d 822 [1990]) was barred by his valid waiver of appeal, except to the extent that it implicates the voluntariness of his plea (Kelley, 239 AD3d at 1269). We further concluded, however, that "to the extent that defendant's contention implicates the voluntariness of the plea, . . . defendant abandoned his requests when he decided to plead guilty while still being represented by the same attorneys" (id.). The Court of Appeals reversed our order, holding that "defendant did not abandon his voluntariness claim" (Kelley, — NY3d at —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904, *1). The Court of Appeals remitted the matter to this Court to "resolve [the contention] on the merits" (id. at —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904, *1).
Defendant contends that the court's failure to conduct an appropriate inquiry into his preplea requests to replace one of his two attorneys representing him implicated the voluntariness of his plea. We reject that contention. Here, the record establishes that the court made the requisite minimal inquiries with respect to defendant's requests, and that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying those requests (see People v Porto, 16 NY3d 93, 99-100 [2010]; People v Jackson, 202 AD3d 1447, 1448 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 38 NY3d 951 [2022]). Moreover, at the plea proceeding itself, defendant affirmed that he was pleading guilty voluntarily, and the record reflects that he received a lenient sentence compared to the potential sentence he was facing on the counts charged in the indictment (see People v Rahman, 129 AD3d 553, 554 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 933 [2015]; see generally People v Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 780-781 [2005]).
Entered: July 24, 2026
Ann Dillon Flynn
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
People v. Kelley (People v. Kelley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.