THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. ANTON KELLEY DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2026)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Now, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals,

It is hereby ORDERED that, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals, the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: This case is before us upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals (People v Kelley, — NY3d —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904 [2026], revg 239 AD3d 1269 [4th Dept 2025]). We previously affirmed the judgment convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). We concluded, inter alia, that our review of defendant's contention that Supreme Court erred by failing to make an appropriate inquiry into his requests for new counsel as required by People v Sides (75 NY2d 822 [1990]) was barred by his valid waiver of appeal, except to the extent that it implicates the voluntariness of his plea (Kelley, 239 AD3d at 1269). We further concluded, however, that “to the extent that defendant's contention implicates the voluntariness of the plea, ․ defendant abandoned his requests when he decided to plead guilty while still being represented by the same attorneys” (id.). The Court of Appeals reversed our order, holding that “defendant did not abandon his voluntariness claim” (Kelley, — NY3d at —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904, *1). The Court of Appeals remitted the matter to this Court to “resolve [the contention] on the merits” (id. at —, 2026 NY Slip Op 03904, *1).

Defendant contends that the court's failure to conduct an appropriate inquiry into his preplea requests to replace one of his two attorneys representing him implicated the voluntariness of his plea. We reject that contention. Here, the record establishes that the court made the requisite minimal inquiries with respect to defendant's requests, and that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying those requests (see People v Porto, 16 NY3d 93, 99-100 [2010]; People v Jackson, 202 AD3d 1447, 1448 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 38 NY3d 951 [2022]). Moreover, at the plea proceeding itself, defendant affirmed that he was pleading guilty voluntarily, and the record reflects that he received a lenient sentence compared to the potential sentence he was facing on the counts charged in the indictment (see People v Rahman, 129 AD3d 553, 554 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 933 [2015]; see generally People v Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 780-781 [2005]).

Entered: July 24, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court