PEOPLE v. WILLIAM (2020)

Judgment of conviction (Marsha D. Michael, J., at plea; Tara A. Collins, J., at sentencing), rendered September 6, 2018, affirmed.

Defendant had the practical ability to withdraw his plea before sentencing, and his challenges to the validity of his plea do not come within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v. Conceicao, 26 NY3d 375, 381—382 [2015]). We decline to review these unpreserved claims in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that the plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently with the aid of counsel, and after the court sufficiently advised defendant of the constitutional rights he would be giving up by pleading guilty (see People v. Pellegrino, 26 NY3d 1063 [2015]; People v. Sougou, 26 NY3d 1052 [2015]), and nothing in the record suggests that defendant's ability to make a voluntary decision to plead guilty was impaired by his use (or “potential” use) of any “substances” (see People v. Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 486 [2002]).

In any event, the only relief defendant requests is dismissal of the accusatory instrument, and he expressly requests that this Court affirm his conviction if it does not grant dismissal. Since dismissal is not warranted, we affirm on this basis as well (see People v. Conceicao, 26 NY3d at 385 n 1 [2015]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.