| People v Johnson |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 02329 [49 AD3d 1244] |
| March 14, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James D.Johnson, Appellant. |
—[*1] William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (James P. Maxwell of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John J. Brunetti, A.J.),rendered June 13, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attemptedcriminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty ofattempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law§§ 110.00, 220.06 [2]), defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in refusing tosuppress the marihuana and cocaine found when his parole officer searched the vehicle thatdefendant had driven to his appointment with the parole officer. We reject that contention. Therecord establishes that defendant previously had failed drug tests and also had failed the drug testgiven on the day in question. In addition, defendant had an inexplicably large amount of cash onhis person that day. We thus conclude that "the conduct of the parole officer was rationally andreasonably related to the performance of the parole officer's duty" (People v Huntley, 43NY2d 175, 181 [1977]; see People v Lopez, 288 AD2d 70 [2001], lv denied 97NY2d 706 [2002]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the factualsufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988];People v Brown, 305 AD2d 1068, 1069 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 579 [2003]). "Inany event, '[a] bargained guilty plea to a lesser crime makes unnecessary a factual basis for theparticular crime confessed' " (People vTurner, 16 AD3d 1150 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 770 [2005], quotingPeople v Clairborne, 29 NY2d 950, 951 [1972]). Finally, the fact that the court did notinform defendant that he may be subject to predicate felon treatment in the future did not renderthe plea involuntary or unknowing (seePeople v Folk, 43 AD3d 1229, 1230 [2007]; People v August, 33 AD3d 1046, 1050 [2006], lv denied 8NY3d 878 [2007]). Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Green, JJ.