People v. Modesto, 2006-02534.

Decision Date03 April 2007
Docket Number2006-02534.
Citation39 A.D.3d 567,2007 NY Slip Op 02959,835 N.Y.S.2d 220
PartiesTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JORGE MODESTO, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim that he did not have the assistance of an interpreter is belied by the record, which reflects the presence of a Spanish interpreter who participated in the plea proceedings. The defendant's further claim that he was deprived of due process by the interpreter's alleged failure to file an oath of public office is based on matter dehors the record and cannot be reviewed on direct appeal (see People v Rivera, 33 AD3d 942 [2006]). To the extent that the defendant complains that the interpreter did not swear to translate truthfully and accurately, his contention is without merit (see People v Rivera, supra; People v Bicet, 180 AD2d 692, 693 [1992]; People v Torres, 96 AD2d 604 [1983]).

The defendant's contention that his post-plea statement appearing in the presentence investigation report required the court to conduct a further inquiry before accepting his plea is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636 [1983]; People v Cooper, 34 AD3d 827 [2006]). In any event, his post-plea assertions do not warrant vacatur of his plea of guilty (see People v Tinsley, 32 AD3d 447 [2006]).

The defendant's remaining contention has been rendered academic.

Rivera, J.P., Spolzino, Fisher, Lifson and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • People v. Mallayev
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 17 Septiembre 2014
    ...eyewitness account, are all based upon matter dehors the record, and cannot be reviewed on direct appeal ( see People v. Modesto, 39 A.D.3d 567, 567, 835 N.Y.S.2d 220; People v. Rivera, 33 A.D.3d 942, 942, 826 N.Y.S.2d 299). The defendant's remaining contentions are without ...
  • People v. Ropiza
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 21 Noviembre 2012
    ...assertions made by him, is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. James, 78 A.D.3d 965, 910 N.Y.S.2d 671;People v. Modesto, 39 A.D.3d 567, 835 N.Y.S.2d 220;People v. Cooper, 34 A.D.3d 827, 823 N.Y.S.2d 917;People v. Tinsley, 32 A.D.3d 447, 820 N.Y.S.2d 305). Moreover, the rare exc......
  • People v. Keenum
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 19 Diciembre 2012
    ...intoxication defense based upon certain post-plea assertions made by him is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Modesto, 39 A.D.3d 567, 835 N.Y.S.2d 220;People v. Harrell, 288 A.D.2d 489, 735 N.Y.S.2d 392;People v. Sierra, 256 A.D.2d 598, 599, 683 N.Y.S.2d 563). Moreover, the r......
  • People v. Bunn
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 28 Diciembre 2010
    ...not warrant vacatur of his plea of guilty ( see People v. Dixon, 29 N.Y.2d 55, 57, 323 N.Y.S.2d 825, 272 N.E.2d 329; People v. Modesto, 39 A.D.3d 567, 835 N.Y.S.2d 220; People v. Tinsley, 32 A.D.3d 447, 820 N.Y.S.2d 305; People v. Eaton, 14 A.D.3d 577, 789 N.Y.S.2d 194; People v. Richardson......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT