People v. Sheskier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sheskier

114 A.D.3d 998, 979 N.Y.S.2d 875

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 13, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.3d 998 (People v. Sheskier) 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. Sheskier, 114 A.D.3d 998, 979 N.Y.S.2d 875 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Lahtinen, J.E

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered December 22, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the second degree.

In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of burglary in the second degree. Defendant was thereafter sentenced as a second felony offender to the agreed-upon prison term of 10 years, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision, and he was ordered to pay restitution. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Defendant contends that he received the ineffec[999]*999tive assistance of counsel inasmuch as counsel failed to, among other things, move to dismiss the indictment as facially insufficient and to demand a bill of particulars. Because the record does not indicate that defendant moved to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is unpreserved for this Court’s review (see People v Youngblood, 107 AD3d 1159, 1160 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1078 [2013]; People v Masso-Diaz, 107 AD3d 1148, 1149 [2013]; People v Veras, 103 AD3d 984, 985 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 947 [2013]). In any event, were this issue properly before us, we would find defendant’s contention without merit. Defendant’s remaining contention has been rendered moot.

Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Lahtinen, J.E

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered December 22, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the second degree.

In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of burglary in the second degree. Defendant was thereafter sentenced as a second felony offender to the agreed-upon prison term of 10 years, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision, and he was ordered to pay restitution. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Defendant contends that he received the ineffec[999]*999tive assistance of counsel inasmuch as counsel failed to, among other things, move to dismiss the indictment as facially insufficient and to demand a bill of particulars. Because the record does not indicate that defendant moved to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is unpreserved for this Court’s review (see People v Youngblood, 107 AD3d 1159, 1160 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1078 [2013]; People v Masso-Diaz, 107 AD3d 1148, 1149 [2013]; People v Veras, 103 AD3d 984, 985 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 947 [2013]). In any event, were this issue properly before us, we would find defendant’s contention without merit. Defendant’s remaining contention has been rendered moot.

Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.3d 998, 979 N.Y.S.2d 875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sheskier-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack