People v. Coachman
| Decision Date | 25 October 2017 |
| Docket Number | 2015-11574. |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Curtis COACHMAN, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
154 A.D.3d 957
63 N.Y.S.3d 94
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Curtis COACHMAN, appellant.
2015-11574.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Oct. 25, 2017.
Del Atwell, East Hampton, NY, for appellant.
Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, NY (Christine DiSalvo and William C. Milaccio of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., SANDRA L. SGROI, JEFFREY A. COHEN, and JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Minihan, J.), rendered October 19, 2015, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v. Sanders, 25 N.Y.3d 337, 341–342, 12 N.Y.S.3d 593, 34 N.E.3d 344 ; People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256–257, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ; People v. Thompson, 150 A.D.3d 1156, 1156–1157, 52 N.Y.S.3d 675 ).
Although a claim that a plea of guilty was not voluntary survives a valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Lujan, 114 A.D.3d 963, 964, 980 N.Y.S.2d 815 ), the defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent, since he did not move to withdraw his plea on this ground prior to the imposition of sentence (see CPL 220.60[3] ; People v. Lujan, 114 A.D.3d at 964, 980 N.Y.S.2d 815 ). In any event, this contention is without merit.
The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, except to the extent that the alleged ineffective assistance may have affected the voluntariness of his plea (see People v. Robinson, 144 A.D.3d 1055, 1056, 40 N.Y.S.3d 909 ; People v. Belle, 74 A.D.3d 1477, 1480, 902 N.Y.S.2d 258 ). To the extent that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Brown
...337, 341, 12 N.Y.S.3d 593, 34 N.E.3d 344 ; People v. Lopez , 6 N.Y.3d 248, 254, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ; People v. Coachman , 154 A.D.3d 957, 957, 63 N.Y.S.3d 94 ). The defendant's contention that his pleas were not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent survives his valid appeal wa......
-
People v. Hendrix
...failed to preserve this contention for appellate review (see People v. McClenic, 155 A.D.3d 1064, 64 N.Y.S.3d 554 ; People v. Coachman, 154 A.D.3d 957, 63 N.Y.S.3d 94 ; People v. Martin, 27 A.D.3d 579, 812 N.Y.S.2d 121 ). In any event, the contention is without merit, as the record reflects......
-
People v. King
...contention that his plea of guilty was not voluntary survives his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Coachman, 154 A.D.3d 957, 63 N.Y.S.3d 94 ; People v. Lujan, 114 A.D.3d 963, 964, 980 N.Y.S.2d 815 ). However, the defendant failed to preserve this contention for appellate r......
-
People v. Kovalsky
...plea on this ground prior to the imposition of sentence (see People v. McClenic, 155 A.D.3d 1064, 64 N.Y.S.3d 554 ; People v. Coachman, 154 A.D.3d 957, 63 N.Y.S.3d 94 ). The narrow exception to the preservation rule is inapplicable in this case, as the defendant's recitation of the facts un......