| People v Young |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 07016 [66 AD3d 1445] |
| October 2, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eric Young,Appellant. |
—[*1] William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (James P. Maxwell of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony F. Aloi, J.), renderedJanuary 2, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attemptedburglary in the second degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, ofattempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2]),defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his alleged "motion" to withdraw his pleaon the ground that the plea was not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered. Of the threegrounds raised in support of his contention on appeal, defendant preserved only one of them forour review, and we decline to exercise our power to review the two unpreserved grounds as amatter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The ground that ispreserved for our review is that defendant lacked the mental ability to enter a plea of guilty. Atsentencing, defense counsel advised the court that defendant had "mental issues" and that he "feltcoerced into entering the plea," whereupon the court specifically addressed issues relating todefendant's competency. We note that, although defendant made no formal motion to withdrawthe plea, the court was given " 'the opportunity to address the perceived error and to takecorrective measures' " (People vLouree, 8 NY3d 541, 545 [2007]). We conclude on the record before us, however, thatnothing in the record of the plea proceeding establishes that defendant's alleged mental illness"so stripped [defendant] of orientation or cognition that he lacked the capacity to plead guilty"(People v Alexander, 97 NY2d 482, 486 [2002]). "A history of prior mental illness ortreatment does not itself call into question defendant's competence" (People v Taylor, 13 AD3d 1168,1169 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 836 [2005]; see People v Williams, 35 AD3d 1273, 1275 [2006], lv denied8 NY3d 928 [2007]), and defendant's responses to the court's inquiries appeared to beinformed, competent and lucid (seePeople v Hayes, 39 AD3d 1173, 1175 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 923 [2007];People v Beaty, 303 AD2d 965 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 559 [2003]). Wethus conclude that defendant's plea was properly entered. Present—Scudder, P.J., Smith,Carni, Pine and Gorski, JJ.