People v. Ortiz

Decision Date30 April 2014
Citation983 N.Y.S.2d 905,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 02958,116 A.D.3d 1070
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Anthony M. ORTIZ, appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, N.Y., for appellant.

Adam B. Levy, District Attorney, Carmel, N.Y. (Heather M. Abissi of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Putnam County (Rooney, J.), entered June 12, 2013, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to withdraw the plea ( see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5;People v. Pryor, 11 A.D.3d 565, 782 N.Y.S.2d 803). In any event, the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made ( see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646;People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d at 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5;People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 17, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170). The defendant's postplea assertion regarding the defense of insanity did not warrant vacatur of his plea of guilty ( see People v. Bunn, 79 A.D.3d 1143, 914 N.Y.S.2d 907).

The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel, as defense counsel provided meaningful representation ( see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584;People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).

The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his contention that the sentence imposed was excessive ( see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 255, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145;People v. Sanders, 112 A.D.3d 748, 976 N.Y.S.2d 205).

MASTRO, J.P., HALL, AUSTIN, SGROI and DUFFY, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • People v. Bennett
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 19, 2014
    ...815 ), but the defendant failed to preserve this claim (see People v. Sabo, 117 A.D.3d 1089, 986 N.Y.S.2d 232 ; People v. Ortiz, 116 A.D.3d 1070, 1070, 983 N.Y.S.2d 905 ; People v. King, 115 A.D.3d 986, 986, 982 N.Y.S.2d 178 ). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the exception to the pr......
  • People v. Bennett
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 19, 2014
    ...815), but the defendant failed to preserve this claim ( see People v. Sabo, 117 A.D.3d 1089, 986 N.Y.S.2d 232; People v. Ortiz, 116 A.D.3d 1070, 1070, 983 N.Y.S.2d 905; People v. King, 115 A.D.3d 986, 986, 982 N.Y.S.2d 178). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the exception to the prese......
  • People v. Richardson
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • April 30, 2014
  • People v. Fontanet
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 4, 2015
    ...(see People v. Bennett, 122 A.D.3d at 871, 996 N.Y.S.2d 369 ; People v. Sabo, 117 A.D.3d 1089, 986 N.Y.S.2d 232 ; People v. Ortiz, 116 A.D.3d 1070, 1070, 983 N.Y.S.2d 905 ). Moreover, contrary to the defendant's contention, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here, ......
  • 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