People v. Simon, 166 A.D.3d 1075

In Sept. 2014 police found defendant in a residence with a loaded stolen revolver, 202 wax envelopes of heroin, 14 Suboxone films, two marijuana cigarettes and paraphernalia; an arrest warrant was outstanding.
Defendant was indicted on multiple counts (weapons, controlled substances, stolen property, resisting arrest) and later charged separately in a superior court information for another heroin possession.
As part of a global disposition, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and executed two waivers of appeal in open court.
After sentencing (aggregate 7 years prison, 5 years postrelease supervision), defendant moved postplea to withdraw his plea; the motion was denied and he appealed.
On appeal defendant argued his plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent because County Court’s plea colloquy failed to adequately advise him of the constitutional rights he waived by pleading guilty.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent because County Court failed to inform defendant of constitutional rights waived by pleading guilty	People contended the plea and appeal waivers were valid and preserved; plea colloquy was sufficient	Simon argued County Court’s abbreviated colloquy did not affirmatively show he waived the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to confront witnesses, or that he specifically discussed waiver with counsel	Court reversed in interest of justice: plea vacated because record lacked an affirmative showing defendant understood and voluntarily waived trial-related constitutional rights
Whether defendant’s claim was preserved despite postplea motion	People argued the plea-withdrawal motion did not raise the specific claim about inadequate admonitions, so the issue is unpreserved	Simon argued his postplea motion preserved appellate review (or otherwise the Court should review)	Appellate court found the claim unpreserved but exercised its interest-of-justice power under CPL 470.15(3)(c) to correct the defect and reverse

People v Tyrell, 22 N.Y.3d 359 (2013) (explains constitutional rights waived by a guilty plea and need for record showing waiver)
Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969) (Supreme Court requires an affirmative showing that the defendant waived trial rights when pleading guilty)
People v Lowe, 133 A.D.3d 1099 (2015) (no fixed script required but record must affirmatively show waiver)
People v Cotto, 156 A.D.3d 1063 (2017) (affirming vacatur where colloquy did not show defendant understood rights waived)
People v Holmes, 162 A.D.3d 1117 (2018) (similar holding: inadequate plea colloquy requires vacatur)
People v Conceicao, 26 N.Y.3d 375 (2015) (preservation principles for postplea motions to withdraw guilty pleas)