Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Francisco PEREZ, Defendant–Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James M. Burke, J.), rendered March 15, 2017, as amended June 6, 2017, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and sentencing him to 11/212 years of incarceration with one year of postrelease supervision, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's contention that his plea was involuntary because the court mistakenly stated that he would face a sentence with a two-year postrelease supervision component if he violated the conditions of his plea agreement, when in fact the maximum term of postrelease supervision for fifth-degree criminal sale of a controlled substance is one year (see Penal Law § 70.45[2][a]), is unpreserved because he failed to either move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10 (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665–666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 [1988]). Under the present circumstances, the narrow exception to the preservation requirement set forth in People v. Louree, 8 N.Y.3d 541, 545–546, 838 N.Y.S.2d 18, 869 N.E.2d 18 (2007), is inapplicable because defendant was placed on notice at the plea proceeding that the sentence he would receive upon violating the terms of the plea agreement would include a period of postrelease supervision and therefore had “actual or practical ability” (People v. Melendez, 201 A.D.3d 444, 445, 159 N.Y.S.3d 55 [1st Dept. 2022], lv denied 38 N.Y.3d 929, 164 N.Y.S.3d 36, 184 N.E.3d 857 [2022]), to move to withdraw his guilty plea before sentencing (see People v. Murray, 15 N.Y.3d 725, 727, 906 N.Y.S.2d 521, 932 N.E.2d 877 [2010]; People v. Brown, 137 A.D.3d 674, 674, 28 N.Y.S.3d 369 [1st Dept. 2016], lv denied 27 N.Y.3d 1149, 39 N.Y.S.3d 383, 62 N.E.3d 123 [2016]).
As an alternative holding, we find that the court's mistaken indication that defendant's sentence could include a two-year term of postrelease supervision could not have had any effect on his determination to accept the plea offer and thus had no bearing on the voluntariness of the guilty plea (see People v. Bruchanan, 37 A.D.3d 169, 169, 828 N.Y.S.2d 399 [1st Dept. 2007], lv denied 8 N.Y.3d 982, 838 N.Y.S.2d 485, 486, 869 N.E.2d 661, 662 [2007]).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 2609
Decided: September 26, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)