People v. Clarke

Jan 21, 2015
2013-07782
Reporters:
,
Before:
Skelos

Ordered that judgments are affirmed.

The defendant‘s contention that his pleas of guilty were not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to withdraw his pleas of guilty or vacate the judgments of conviction (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]; People v Williams, 110 AD3d 746, 747 [2013]). Contrary to the defendant‘s contention, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here, since the defendant‘s recitation of the facts underlying the crimes to which he pleaded guilty did not clearly cast significant doubt on his guilt, negate an essential element of the crimes, or call into question the voluntariness of the pleas (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d at 666; People v Williams, 110 AD3d at 747).

In addition, appellate review of the defendant‘s claims concerning his factual allocution at the plea proceeding and his claims concerning the denial of his suppression motion is precluded by his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v King, 115 AD3d 986, 987 [2014]; People v Budden, 77 AD3d 672 [2010]). Skelos, J.P., Dillon, Miller and LaSalle, JJ., concur.