PEOPLE v. BRACEWELL (2006)

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of three counts of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [1] ) and one count of assault in the third degree (§ 120.00[1] ).   By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his present challenges to the alleged lack of specificity and the alleged duplicity of the accusatory instrument “inasmuch as the alleged error[s] did not render the accusatory instrument jurisdictionally defective” (People v. Monacelli, 299 A.D.2d 916, 916, 750 N.Y.S.2d 690, lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 617, 757 N.Y.S.2d 828, 787 N.E.2d 1174;  see generally People v. Hansen, 95 N.Y.2d 227, 230-232, 715 N.Y.S.2d 369, 738 N.E.2d 773;  People v. Almarez, 19 A.D.3d 1005, 796 N.Y.S.2d 780, order amended on other grounds 21 A.D.3d 1438, 801 N.Y.S.2d 549).   The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: