The People, etc., respondent, v. Anthony Paruolo, appellant. (2026)

Argued—April 27, 2026

DECISION & ORDER

M/

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Robert A. Schwartz, J.), rendered January 30, 2025, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or otherwise raise the issue in the County Court (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665;  People v. Escobargarcia, 237 AD3d 1221, 1222).  Moreover, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the defendant's allocution did not cast significant doubt on his guilt as to the crime to which he pleaded, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of his plea (see People v. Bermudez–Cedillos, 228 AD3d 681, 682).  In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Sougou, 26 NY3d 1052, 1055;  People v. Escobargarcia, 237 AD3d at 1222).

Further, by pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited any claims of ineffective assistance of counsel that did not directly involve the plea negotiation process (see People v. Petgen, 55 N.Y.2d 529, 534–535;  People v. Ponce, 232 AD3d 741, 742).  To the extent that the defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not forfeited by his plea of guilty, that contention is based, in part, on matter appearing on the record and, in part, on matter outside the record, and, thus, constitutes a “mixed claim of ineffective assistance” (People v. Maxwell, 89 AD3d 1108, 1109;  see People v. Evans, 16 NY3d 571, 575 n 2).  Since the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be resolved without reference to matter outside the record, a CPL 440.10 proceeding is the appropriate forum for reviewing the claim in its entirety, and we decline to review the claim on this direct appeal (see People v. Ponce, 232 AD3d at 742).

CONNOLLY, J.P., CHAMBERS, VENTURA and OTTLEY, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court