People v. Rodriguez-Ovalles
| Decision Date | 29 June 2010 |
| Citation | 74 A.D.3d 1368,903 N.Y.S.2d 258 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Daniel RODRIGUEZ-OVALLES, also known as Daniel Rodriguez, also known as Daniel Ovalles, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
74 A.D.3d 1368
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Daniel RODRIGUEZ-OVALLES, also known as Daniel Rodriguez, also known as Daniel Ovalles, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
June 29, 2010.
Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Elizabeth L. Guinup and Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (De Rosa, J.), rendered May 22, 2009, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made is without merit ( see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145). As the defendant correctly argues, a claim with respect to the voluntariness of a plea survives even a valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v. Elcine, 43 A.D.3d 1176, 1177, 843 N.Y.S.2d 343). However, the defendant's contention that his plea was not knowing and voluntary is unpreserved for appellate review because he failed to move to withdraw his plea of guilty prior to sentencing ( see CPL 220.60[3]; People v. Marcinak, 69 A.D.3d 654, 655, 893 N.Y.S.2d 171, lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 842, 901 N.Y.S.2d 148, 927 N.E.2d 569; People v. Velez, 64 A.D.3d 799, 799, 882 N.Y.S.2d 712). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently ( see People v. Marcinak, 69 A.D.3d at 655, 893 N.Y.S.2d 171).
Moreover, by pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited his
claims of ineffective assistance of counsel to the extent that they do not directly involve the bargaining process ( see People v. Aguayo, 73 A.D.3d 938, 899 N.Y.S.2d 878; People v. Perazzo, 65 A.D.3d 1058, 1059, 886 N.Y.S.2d 43; People v. Russell, 58 A.D.3d 759, 760, 871 N.Y.S.2d 702). To the extent that the claim can be reviewed, and involves an alleged effect on the voluntariness of his plea of guilty, the defendant was afforded meaningful representation ( see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584).The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his remaining contentions.
SKELOS, J.P., SANTUCCI, DICKERSON and LEVENTHAL, JJ., concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Pelaez
...Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 10, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968, 541 N.E.2d 1022;see People v. McLean, 77 A.D.3d 684, 908 N.Y.S.2d 352;People v. Rodriguez–Ovalles, 74 A.D.3d 1368, 903 N.Y.S.2d 258). Additionally, certain other claims survive a valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d ......
-
People v. Cohen
...even a valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v. McLean, 77 A.D.3d 684, 684, 908 N.Y.S.2d 352;People v. Rodriguez–Ovalles, 74 A.D.3d 1368, 1368, 903 N.Y.S.2d 258;People v. Elcine, 43 A.D.3d 1176, 1177, 843 N.Y.S.2d 343;see also People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 10, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968,......
-
People v. Magnotta
...meaningful representation (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584 ; People v. Rodriguez–Ovalles, 74 A.D.3d 1368, 903 N.Y.S.2d 258 ).By pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited judicial review of his contentions that the grand jury proceeding was render......
- People v. Rojas