| People v Bullock |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 08510 [78 AD3d 1697] |
| November 19, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Bullock,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.), renderedSeptember 29, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in thesecond degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of assaultin the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2]). The contention of defendant that his plea wasnot knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered is actually a challenge to the factual sufficiency of theplea allocution (see People v Hendrix, 62AD3d 1261 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 925 [2009]). Defendant failed to preserve thatcontention for our review because he did not move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment ofconviction (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665-666 [1988]) and, in any event, hiscontention lacks merit. Defendant's monosyllabic responses to County Court's questions did not renderthe plea invalid (see Hendrix, 62 AD3d 1261; see also People v VanDeViver, 56 AD3d 1118 [2008], lvdenied 11 NY3d 931 [2009], reconsideration denied 12 NY3d 788 [2009]). Moreover, "'there is no requirement that a defendant personally recite the facts underlying his or her crime[ ]' "during the plea colloquy (People vMadison, 71 AD3d 1422, 1423 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 753 [2010]; see People v Bailey, 49 AD3d 1258[2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 932 [2008]) and, here, "[t]he record establishes that defendantconfirmed the accuracy of [the court's] recitation of the facts underlying the crime" (People v Whipple, 37 AD3d 1148[2007], lv denied 8 NY3d 928 [2007]). Present—Centra, J.P., Carni, Sconiers andPine, JJ.