PEOPLE v. NICHOLS (2007)

 On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.15[3] ), defendant contends that his plea must be vacated because County Court failed to inquire into a possible defense.   By failing to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant has not preserved that contention for our review (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5;  People v. Thomas, 17 A.D.3d 1123, 794 N.Y.S.2d 257, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 770, 801 N.Y.S.2d 264, 834 N.E.2d 1274), and this case does not qualify for the “rare exception to the preservation requirement” (People v. Dille, 21 A.D.3d 1298, 1298, 801 N.Y.S.2d 199, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 882, 808 N.Y.S.2d 585, 842 N.E.2d 483;  see Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d at 666-667, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5).   Additionally, by pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his contention with respect to the alleged legal insufficiency of the evidence of guilt (see People v. Heinig, 21 A.D.3d 1297, 801 N.Y.S.2d 670, lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 813, 812 N.Y.S.2d 453, 845 N.E.2d 1284).   We have considered the remaining contentions of defendant and conclude that they are without merit.

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

MEMORANDUM: