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. Christopher A. FREDERICK, Appellant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Kevin P. Dooley, J.), rendered March 6, 2020, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.
In satisfaction of an eight-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and waived his right to appeal. Defendant was sentenced, as a second felony offender with a prior violent felony, to the agreed-upon prison term of 21/212 years followed by 2 years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.
Although not precluded by his waiver of the right to appeal, defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of the plea and/or sufficiency of the plea colloquy is unpreserved for our review given that defendant did not make an appropriate postallocution motion, despite having an opportunity to do so (see People v. Loya, 215 A.D.3d 1181, 1183, 187 N.Y.S.3d 444 [3d Dept. 2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 929, 192 N.Y.S.3d 502, 213 N.E.3d 644 [2023]; People v. Hilliard, 214 A.D.3d 1259, 1260, 184 N.Y.S.3d 638 [3d Dept. 2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 929, 192 N.Y.S.3d 501, 213 N.E.3d 643 [2023]). Further, the narrow exception to the preservation requirement was not triggered here, as the record does not reflect that defendant made any statements that negated an element of the charged crime, cast doubt upon his guilt or otherwise called into question the voluntariness of the plea (see People v. Loya, 215 A.D.3d at 1183, 187 N.Y.S.3d 444; People v. Rubert, 206 A.D.3d 1378, 1380, 170 N.Y.S.3d 346 [3d Dept. 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 942, 177 N.Y.S.3d 518, 198 N.E.3d 761 [2022]). To the extent defendant requests that we take corrective action in the interest of justice, we decline to do so (see People v. Miller, 215 A.D.3d 1141, 1142, 186 N.Y.S.3d 445 [3d Dept. 2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 930, 192 N.Y.S.3d 497, 213 N.E.3d 639 [2023]).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Clark, J.
Lynch, J.P., Aarons, Pritzker and Ceresia, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
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: 112516
Decided: October 12, 2023
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
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)