| People v Infante |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02581 [71 AD3d 1047] |
| March 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v PedroInfante, Appellant. |
—[*1] Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Robert A. Schwartz and AndrewFukuda of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Jaeger, J.),rendered April 25, 2007, convicting him of burglary in the third degree and possession ofburglar's tools, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his plea allocution was factually insufficient to establish thecrimes of burglary in the third degree and possession of burglar's tools is not preserved forappellate review because the defendant failed to move to withdraw his plea (see People vClarke, 93 NY2d 904 [1999]; People v Pratcher, 50 AD3d 1063 [2008]; People vWright, 34 AD3d 507 [2006]). Moreover, the "rare case" exception to the preservationrequirement as enunciated in People v Lopez (71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]), does not applybecause the defendant's allocution did not cast significant doubt on his guilt, negate an essentialelement of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of the plea (see People vKelly, 50 AD3d 921 [2008]; People v Smith, 43 AD3d 474 [2007]; People vRoss, 41 AD3d 870 [2007]; People v Nash, 38 AD3d 684 [2007]).
Further, since the defendant chose to proceed with the sentencing instead of moving towithdraw his plea of guilty when given the opportunity by the County Court, he waived hiscurrent contention that he should be permitted to withdraw his plea (see People vPaugam, 57 AD3d 1012 [2008]).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court providently exercised its discretion indenying his application for a substitution of new assigned counsel. The trial court conducted asufficient inquiry regarding the basis of the defendant's request and the defendant failed toprovide good cause for the substitution of new counsel (see People v Linares, 2 NY3d507 [2004]; People v Lopez, 49 AD3d 899 [2008]; People v Stevenson, 36 AD3d634 [2007]; People v Sanchez, 7 AD3d 645 [2004]). Mastro, J.P., Skelos, Eng andRoman, JJ., concur.