PEOPLE v. FELICIANO (2025)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael J. Obus, J.), rendered November 19, 2018, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent violent felony offender, to a term of 12 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to preserve his argument that his plea was invalid because the plea agreement allegedly conditioned access to adequate medical care on pleading guilty (see People v. Flowers, 30 N.Y.2d 315, 333 N.Y.S.2d 393, 284 N.E.2d 557 [1972]) or his argument that the plea agreement was impermissibly vague.  Defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10 (see People v. Louree, 8 N.Y.3d 541, 545, 838 N.Y.S.2d 18, 869 N.E.2d 18 [2007]) and the instant circumstances do not qualify for the narrow exception to the preservation rule set forth in People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 (1988).  As alternative holdings, we find that defendant fails to establish that his guilty plea was, to any degree, the product of duress (see People v. Flowers, 30 N.Y.2d 315, 333 N.Y.S.2d 393, 284 N.E.2d 557) or that the plea agreement was impermissibly vague.

Defendant's argument that the court violated due process and abused its discretion by imposing the negotiated 12–year prison term after defendant twice violated the conditions of his placement in a nursing home is unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice.  As an alternative holding, we find that the court acted within its discretion.