| People v Sands |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 09084 [45 AD3d 414] |
| November 20, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Patrick Sands, Appellant. |
—[*1] Patrick Sands, appellant pro se. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York City (Martin J. Foncello of counsel),for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard D. Carruthers, J.), renderedSeptember 19, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree,and sentencing him to a term of eight years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion inthe interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of six years, and otherwiseaffirmed.
Defendant did not preserve his claim that his plea allocution was insufficient because thecourt did not inquire about a possible defense, and we decline to review it in the interest ofjustice. The narrow exception to the preservation rule explained in People v Lopez (71NY2d 662, 665-666 [1988]) does not apply since defendant's factual allocution does not castsignificant doubt on his guilt. The court's duty to inquire was not triggered by statementsdefendant may have made at junctures other than the plea proceeding itself (see e.g. People v Blackwell, 41 AD3d 121[2007]; People v Fiallo, 6 AD3d176 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 640 [2004]; People v Negron, 222 AD2d 327[1995], lv denied 88 NY2d 882 [1996]). Were we to review this claim, we would findthat defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily pleaded guilty.
We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.[*2]
We have considered the claims raised in defendant's prose supplemental brief and find them without merit. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli,Marlow, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ.