People v. Worthy

Dec 21, 2007
Versions:46 A.D.3d 1382
847 N.Y.S.2d 806

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20). The contention of defendant that his plea was coerced and thus was not knowingly, voluntarily or intelligently entered “is belied by [his] statement during the plea proceeding that [he] was not threatened, coerced or otherwise influenced against [his] will into pleading guilty” (People v Beaty, 303 AD2d 965 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 559 [2003]; see People v Gradia, 28 AD3d 1206, 1206-1207 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 756 [2006]). Defendant‘s conclusory and unsubstantiated claim of innocence also is belied by his statements during the plea proceeding (see People v Kimmons, 39 AD3d 1180 [2007]; People v Jackson, 34 AD3d 1304 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 846, 986 [2007]). Contrary to the further contention of defendant, the record reflects that his waiver of the right to appeal was the result of a knowing and voluntary choice (see People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]; People v Ludlow, 42 AD3d 941 [2007]), and that waiver encompasses defendant‘s challenge to Supreme Court‘s suppression ruling (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v Pan Zhi Feng, 15 AD3d 862 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 809 [2005]).

We have considered defendant‘s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Present—Martoche, J.P., Smith, Centra, Peradotto and Green, JJ.