PEOPLE v. CHAUDHRY (2019)

Judgment of conviction (Charlotte E. Davidson, J.), rendered January 22, 2018, affirmed.

Defendant's challenge to her plea is unpreserved and does not come within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v. Conceicao, 26 NY3d 375, 381-382 [2015]). We decline to review this claim in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that the record establishes that defendant's guilty plea to disorderly conduct, a violation, in satisfaction of all charges in the misdemeanor complaint, was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see People v. Conceicao, 26 NY3d at 382). At the plea proceeding, defendant stated that she had ample time to discuss her case with counsel, waived specific constitutional rights, including the right to a trial by jury, and acknowledged that she would be sentenced to a conditional discharge, which required her to perform four days of community service.

In any event, the only relief defendant requests is dismissal of the accusatory instrument, rather than vacatur of the plea, and she expressly requests that this court affirm her 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; People v. Teron, 139 AD3d 450 [2016]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.