People v. Haynes
| Decision Date | 27 May 2021 |
| Docket Number | 110462 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nakeem HAYNES, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Lisa A. Burgess, Indian Lake, for appellant.
Craig P. Carriero, District Attorney, Malone (Jennifer M. Hollis of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Lynch and Colangelo, JJ.
Egan Jr., J.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Champagne, J.), rendered May 11, 2018, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.
Defendant pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and agreed to waive his right to appeal. He was sentenced, as a second felony offender, to 1½ to 3 years in prison. Defendant appeals.
Defendant contends that the waiver of the right to appeal is invalid and that his plea was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent. Regardless of the validity of the appeal waiver, defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of the plea survives any such waiver (see People v. Thomas, 190 A.D.3d 1157, 1159, 139 N.Y.S.3d 458 [2021] ; People v. Payson, 189 A.D.3d 1820, 1822, 137 N.Y.S.3d 580 [2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 1099, 144 N.Y.S.3d 114, 167 N.E.3d 1249 [2021] ; People v. Smith, 188 A.D.3d 1357, 1357, 133 N.Y.S.3d 689 [2020] ). Defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of the plea, however, is unpreserved as the record does not reflect that defendant made an appropriate postallocution motion, and a review of the plea colloquy does not demonstrate that the narrow exception to the preservation requirement is applicable (see People v. Leach, 26 N.Y.3d 1154, 1154, 28 N.Y.S.3d 355, 48 N.E.3d 497 [2016] ; People v. Smith, 188 A.D.3d at 1357, 133 N.Y.S.3d 689 ; People v. Hummel–Parker, 171 A.D.3d 1397, 1398, 97 N.Y.S.3d 539 [2019] ; People v. Peryea, 169 A.D.3d 1120, 1121, 93 N.Y.S.3d 456 [2019], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 980, 101 N.Y.S.3d 242, 124 N.E.3d 731 [2019] ). As such, the judgment of conviction will not be disturbed.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Loya
...477, 185 N.E.3d 998 [Mar. 23, 2022]; People v. Nos, 38 N.Y.3d 952, 165 N.Y.S.3d 480, 185 N.E.3d 1001 [Mar. 23, 2022]; People v. Haynes, 194 A.D.3d 1310, 1310, 144 N.Y.S.3d 648 [2021] ), and the narrow exception to the preservation requirement was not triggered here, "as defendant did not ma......
-
People v. Harris
...to the preservation requirement (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665–666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 [1988] ; People v. Haynes, 194 A.D.3d 1310, 1310, 144 N.Y.S.3d 648 [2021] ). In the absence of a postallocution motion, defendant's contention that he received ineffective assistance......
-
People v. Loya
...postallocution motion (see People v Linear, 200 A.D.3d 1498, 1499 [2021], lvs denied ___ N.Y.3d ___ [Mar. 23, 2022]; People v Haynes, 194 A.D.3d 1310, 1310 [2021]), the narrow exception to the preservation requirement was not triggered here, "as defendant did not make any statements during ......
-
People v. Terpening
...upon, as relevant here, his claim of coercion, survives his appeal waiver – regardless of its validity (see People v. Haynes, 194 A.D.3d 1310, 1310, 144 N.Y.S.3d 648 [3d Dept. 2021] ; People v. Lende, 190 A.D.3d 1110, 1111, 139 N.Y.S.3d 715 [3d Dept. 2021], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 1121, 146 N.Y......