People v Smith
2008 NY Slip Op 07700 [55 AD3d 639]
October 7, 2008
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 10, 2008


The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
TarrenceSmith, Appellant.

[*1]Michael G. Paul, New City, N.Y., for appellant.

Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Elizabeth L. Guinup and Andrew R. Kassof counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.),rendered August 15, 2006, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifthdegree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Having failed to move to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing, the defendant's current contentionsthat his plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered, and that he was denied theeffective assistance of counsel, are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Toxey, 86NY2d 725 [1995]; People v LeGrady,50 AD3d 1059 [2008]; People vRoss, 41 AD3d 870 [2007]; Peoplev Fecu, 38 AD3d 565 [2007]; People v Huchital, 22 AD3d 681 [2005]). This case does not fall withinthe narrow exception which arises when the defendant's plea recitation of the facts underlying the crimecasts significant doubt on the defendant's guilt (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662 [1988]; People v LeGrady, 50 AD3d 1059[2008]; People v Ross, 41 AD3d870 [2007]). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was enteredknowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543[1993]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 283 [1992]; People v Moissett, 76 NY2d909, 910-911 [1990]; People v Matos,27 AD3d 485 [2006]). Furthermore, the defendant's claims cannot be reached on this appealfor the additional reason that they are based on matters which are outside the record (see People v LeGrady, 50 AD3d 1059[2008]; People v Ross, 41 AD3d870 [2007]; People v Villacreses,12 AD3d 624, 626 [2004]).[*2]

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People vSuitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Miller, Dickerson and Eng, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.