PEOPLE v. WHITE (2007)

 Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.50[4] ) and endangering the welfare of a child (§ 260.10[1] ).   To the extent that defendant's contention concerning ineffective assistance of counsel survives the guilty plea and defendant's waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Nichols, 32 A.D.3d 1316, 821 N.Y.S.2d 534;  People v. Fifield, 24 A.D.3d 1221, 1222, 807 N.Y.S.2d 256, lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 775, 811 N.Y.S.2d 342, 844 N.E.2d 797), we conclude that defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review inasmuch as he did not move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction on that ground (see People v. Thompson, 4 A.D.3d 785, 771 N.Y.S.2d 436, lv. denied 2 N.Y.3d 808, 781 N.Y.S.2d 307, 814 N.E.2d 479;  see also People v. Fulford, 296 A.D.2d 661, 662, 745 N.Y.S.2d 596).   In any event, defendant's contention is without merit because defendant has failed to establish “the absence of [a] strategic or other legitimate explanation” for defense counsel's action in advising defendant to accept a plea rather than seeking suppression of statements made by defendant to the police (People v. Goncalves, 283 A.D.2d 1005, 1005, 725 N.Y.S.2d 776, lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 918, 732 N.Y.S.2d 635, 758 N.E.2d 661;  see generally People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404, 633 N.Y.S.2d 270, 657 N.E.2d 265).

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

MEMORANDUM: