People v. Fernandez

• Decision Date: 06 February 1986
• Citation: 67 N.Y.2d 686,490 N.E.2d 838,499 N.Y.S.2d 919
• Parties: , 490 N.E.2d 838 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Frank FERNANDEZ, Appellant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 919

499 N.Y.S.2d 919

67 N.Y.2d 686, 490 N.E.2d 838

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v.Frank FERNANDEZ, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Feb. 6, 1986.

James J. Cruise, Jr., Brentwood, for appellant.

John J. Santucci, Dist. Atty. (Ray F. Cerreta of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURTMEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division, 110 A.D.2d 657, 487 N.Y.S.2d 387, should be affirmed.

A guilty plea generally results in a forfeiture of the right to appellate review of any nonjurisdictional defects in the proceedings (People v. Prescott, 66 N.Y.2d 216, 220, 495 N.Y.S.2d 955, 486 N.E.2d 813).CPL 710.70(2) carves out a limited exception providing that an order finally denying a motion to suppress evidence may be reviewed on appeal from a final judgment of conviction, even one entered upon a guilty plea.That exception is unavailable to this defendant, who pleaded guilty before obtaining such an order.That he may have believed his plea would not result in such forfeiture is irrelevant, because, even if communicated to the court, a subjective belief cannot permit evasion of what otherwise would be the consequences of the plea (People v. Mack, 53 N.Y.2d 803, 806, 439 N.Y.S.2d 912, 422 N.E.2d 572).Moreover, by pleading guilty before the hearing on his suppression motion, defendant precluded the making of a record and, in consequence, foreclosed the possibility of appellate review of his challenge to the admissibility of the People's evidence (see, People v. Charleston, 54 N.Y.2d 622, 623, ...