PEOPLE v. EDWARDS (2008)

 Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120. 05 [3] ) and resisting arrest (§ 205.30).   Contrary to the contention of defendant, the police had reasonable suspicion to stop and temporarily detain him for questioning inasmuch as he matched the description of the suspect given to the police and was found by the police in proximity to the location of the crime (see People v. Casillas, 289 A.D.2d 1063, 1064, 736 N.Y.S.2d 207, lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 752, 742 N.Y.S.2d 612, 769 N.E.2d 358;  People v. Glaze, 255 A.D.2d 932, 680 N.Y.S.2d 381, lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 853, 688 N.Y.S.2d 500, 710 N.E.2d 1099;  see generally People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 223, 386 N.Y.S.2d 375, 352 N.E.2d 562).   Based on that reasonable suspicion, the police were entitled to pursue defendant when he fled (see People v. Martinez, 80 N.Y.2d 444, 446, 591 N.Y.S.2d 823, 606 N.E.2d 951;  People v. Davis, 48 A.D.3d 1120, 1121-1122, 851 N.Y.S.2d 320).

 Defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5;  People v. Dorrah, 50 A.D.3d 1619, 856 N.Y.S.2d 406) and, in any event, that challenge is without merit.   The record establishes that defendant admitted each of the elements of the crimes to which he pleaded guilty (see People v. Gibbs, 31 A.D.3d 1186, 817 N.Y.S.2d 546, lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 867, 824 N.Y.S.2d 612, 857 N.E.2d 1143;  People v. Emm, 23 A.D.3d 983, 984, 804 N.Y.S.2d 880, lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 775, 811 N.Y.S.2d 342, 844 N.E.2d 797) and, contrary to defendant's further contention, County Court conducted the requisite further inquiry when defendant equivocated on his guilt for the crime of resisting arrest (see Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d at 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5;  People v. Brow, 255 A.D.2d 904, 682 N.Y.S.2d 320).   Defendant initially responded in the negative when asked whether he intentionally prevented or attempted to prevent the State Trooper from arresting him, whereupon the court indicated to defendant that he should not plead guilty to that crime.   Upon conferring with defense counsel, defendant then responded in the affirmative when the court repeated the question.   Finally, by pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his contention concerning the sufficiency of the evidence before the grand jury (see People v. Taylor, 65 N.Y.2d 1, 5, 489 N.Y.S.2d 152, 478 N.E.2d 755;  People v. Dunbar, 53 N.Y.2d 868, 871, 440 N.Y.S.2d 613, 423 N.E.2d 36;   People v. Ware, 34 A.D.3d 860, 823 N.Y.S.2d 558, lv. denied 8 N.Y.3d 951, 836 N.Y.S.2d 561, 868 N.E.2d 244), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

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

MEMORANDUM: