Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. ANTHONY C. HARRIS, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 170.25). We agree with defendant that his waiver of the right to appeal is invalid. “During the plea colloquy, County Court conflated the appeal waiver with the rights automatically waived by the guilty plea” (People v. Sanborn, 107 AD3d 1457, 1458 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Tate, 83 AD3d 1467, 1467).
Defendant failed to move to withdraw his guilty plea under CPL 220.60(3) or to vacate the judgment of conviction under CPL 440.10 and, therefore, his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution is not preserved for our review (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665; People v. McKeon, 78 AD3d 1617, 1618, lv denied 16 NY3d 799). Further, this is not one of those “rare case[s]” in which, during the plea allocution, “defendant's recitation of the facts underlying the crime pleaded to clearly casts significant doubt upon the defendant's guilt or otherwise calls into question the voluntariness of the plea” (Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d at 666). In any event, we note that “no factual colloquy was required inasmuch as defendant pleaded guilty to a crime lesser than that charged in the indictment” (People v. Richards, 93 AD3d 1240, 1240, lv denied 20 NY3d 1014; see People v. Neil, 112 AD3d 1335, 1336, lv denied 23 NY3d 1040).
Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: KA 13–01174
Decided: February 13, 2015
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)