People v Hey
2010 NY Slip Op 05295 [74 AD3d 1582]
June 17, 2010
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 25, 2010


The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Jeffrey A. Hey, Appellant.

[*1]Michael C. Ross, Bloomingburg, for appellant.

Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), forrespondent.

Cardona, P.J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (McDonough,J.), rendered June 25, 2009, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes ofvehicular manslaughter in the first degree (two counts), driving while intoxicated (two counts)and leaving the scene of an incident without reporting, and of the traffic infraction of followingtoo closely.

Around 9:00 p.m. on July 19, 2008, after a day spent consuming a large quantity of alcohol,defendant drove his automobile into the back of a motorcycle being driven by 20-year-oldMatthew Spiconardi, who died as a result of the injuries he sustained. Although defendant's frontbumper was torn from his vehicle during the accident, he did not stop driving after the impactand, instead, proceeded home. Defendant was arrested shortly thereafter and a chemical testadministered later that night revealed his blood alcohol content to be .21%. Defendant wassubsequently charged in an indictment with two counts of vehicular manslaughter in the firstdegree, two counts of driving while intoxicated as a felony, leaving the scene of an accident anda traffic infraction. He pleaded guilty to each count and received concurrent sentences resultingin an aggregate prison term of 4 to 12 years. This appeal ensued.

Initially, defendant's challenges to the voluntariness of his plea and the factual adequacy ofhis plea allocution are not preserved for our review because he did not move to withdraw the[*2]plea or vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v Bethel, 69 AD3d1126, 1127 [2010]; People vDixon, 66 AD3d 1237, 1237 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 906 [2009]). Moreover,inasmuch as defendant did not make any statements during his plea colloquy that wereinconsistent with his guilt or otherwise called into question the voluntariness of his plea, thenarrow exception to the preservation rule does not apply (see People v Parsons, 65 AD3d 716 [2009], lv denied 13NY3d 838 [2009]).

We are similarly unpersuaded by defendant's argument that his sentence is harsh andexcessive. The record does not demonstrate any extraordinary circumstances or an abuse ofdiscretion by County Court warranting a reduction of defendant's sentence in the interest ofjustice (see People v Williams, 65AD3d 1423, 1424 [2009]; People vMiller, 21 AD3d 1146, 1147 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 854 [2005]).

Mercure, Lahtinen, Malone Jr. and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.


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.