People v. Kenrick

• Decision Date: 25 November 1996
• Citation: 233 A.D.2d 528,650 N.Y.S.2d 973
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph KENRICK, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 973

650 N.Y.S.2d 973

233 A.D.2d 528

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph KENRICK, Appellant.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

Nov. 25, 1996.

Ron Stokes, Mohegan Lake, for appellant.

Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains (Richard Longworth Hecht of counsel; Joseph Shumofsky, on the brief), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), rendered May 16, 1995, convicting him of attempted kidnapping in the second degree and criminal use of a firearm in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's current challenge to the validity of his plea of guilty is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Proctor, 79 N.Y.2d 992, 584 N.Y.S.2d 435, 594 N.E.2d 929; People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5; People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636, 467 N.Y.S.2d 355, 454 N.E.2d 938). In any event, his contention is unequivocally refuted by the record of the plea proceedings (see, e.g., People v. Santana, 176 A.D.2d 360, 574 N.Y.S.2d 593), which demonstrates that his plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170).

The defendant has foreclosed appellate review of his claim that his statutory right to a speedy trial was violated (see, CPL 30.30) by entering a plea of guilty (see, People v. Prescott, 66 N.Y.2d 216, 219-220, 495 N.Y.S.2d 955, 486 N.E.2d 813; People v. Howe, 56 N.Y.2d 622, 450 N.Y.S.2d 477, 435 N.E.2d 1092).

SULLIVAN, J.P., and COPERTINO, SANTUCCI and FLORIO, JJ., concur.