People v. Ross

2019 NY Slip Op 4205
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Ross. Read the opinion of the Court — 185 A.D.3d 1537
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 29, 2019·No. 2017-11024·Published

Opinion

People v Ross (2019 NY Slip Op 04205)
People v Ross
2019 NY Slip Op 04205
Decided on May 29, 2019
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 May 29, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
HECTOR D. LASALLE
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

2017-11024

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

v

Christopher Ross, appellant. (S.C.I. No. 16-01231)


Marianne Karas, Thornwood, NY, for appellant.

Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, NY (Raffaelina Gianfrancesco and William C. Milaccio of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Larry J. Schwartz, J.), rendered August 23, 2017, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that his purported waiver of the right to appeal was invalid and that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. As the defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his plea survives even a valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10; People v Innocent, 132 AD3d 696, 696), we need not determine whether the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was invalid (see People v Bernard, 155 AD3d 1059; People v Ward, 140 AD3d 903, 904; People v Harvey, 137 AD3d 1162, 1163). The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to vacate his plea or otherwise raise the issue in the County Court, and the exception to the preservation rule does not apply (see CPL 470.05; People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725, 726; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666; People v Peralta, ___ AD3d ___, 2019 NY Slip Op 02723 [2d Dept 2019]). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543; People v Ribeiro, ___ AD3d ___, 2019 NY Slip Op 03083 [2d Dept 2019]).

BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, LASALLE and IANNACCI, 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. Ross, 2019 NY Slip Op 4205 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

2019 NY Slip Op 4205 (People v. Ross) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Fiumefreddo
626 N.E.2d 646 (New York Court of Appeals, 1993)
People v. Toxey
655 N.E.2d 160 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
People v. Innocent
132 A.D.3d 696 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Harvey
137 A.D.3d 1162 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. Ward
140 A.D.3d 903 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. Bernard
2017 NY Slip Op 8388 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Peralta
2019 NY Slip Op 2723 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Ribeiro
2019 NY Slip Op 3083 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Lopez
525 N.E.2d 5 (New York Court of Appeals, 1988)
People v. Seaberg
541 N.E.2d 1022 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)