People v Harrison
2009 NY Slip Op 06741 [66 AD3d 1057]
October 1, 2009
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 9, 2009


The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
KeithT. Harrison II, Appellant.

[*1]Dale Dorner, Greenville, for appellant.

Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), forrespondent.

Malone Jr., J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J.),rendered September 21, 2007, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime ofmanslaughter in the first degree.

Defendant was charged in a five-count indictment with murder in the second degree,manslaughter in the first degree, manslaughter in the second degree, assault in the second degreeand endangering the welfare of a minor. The charges stemmed from an incident wheredefendant's one-month-old son died allegedly as the result of defendant attempting to stop theinfant from crying by first covering his mouth and then causing the child's head to violentlystrike the headboard of defendant's bed. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guiltyto manslaughter in the first degree in full satisfaction of the indictment and was sentenced to thebargained-for term of 15 years in prison followed by five years of postrelease supervision.Defendant now appeals and we affirm.

Defendant's challenge to the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution was not preserved forour review in light of his failure to move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment ofconviction (see People v Florance, 58 AD3d 887, 887 [2009]; People v Sanabria, 43 AD3d1228, 1229 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 993 [2007]). Moreover, contrary todefendant's contention, he [*2]did not make any statementsduring the plea allocution that cast doubt about his guilt or negated an essential element of thecrime so as to trigger the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v Johnson, 54 AD3d1133, 1133 [2008]; People vSinclair, 48 AD3d 974, 975 [2008]).

Cardona, P.J., Peters, Lahtinen and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


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.