| People v Bunn |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 09929 [79 AD3d 1143] |
| December 28, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Ashanti Bunn, Appellant. |
—[*1] William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Joan H. McCarthy of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.),rendered April 14, 2010, convicting him of manslaughter in the second degree, upon his plea ofguilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligentis unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to withdraw the plea (see People vLopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]; People v Nowell, 46 AD3d 707 [2007]; Peoplev Martinez, 33 AD3d 631, 632 [2006]; People v Pryor, 11 AD3d 565, 566 [2004]).In any event, the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see People vFiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d at 666;People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 17 [1983]).
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel as aconsequence of his attorney's failure to make a motion to withdraw his plea based on his postpleastatements appearing in the presentence investigation report is without merit. The defendant'spostplea assertions regarding the defense of justification did not warrant vacatur of his plea ofguilty (see People v Dixon, 29 NY2d 55, 57 [1971]; People v Modesto, 39 AD3d567 [2007]; People v Tinsley, 32 AD3d 447 [2006]; People v Eaton, 14 AD3d577 [2005]; People v Richardson, 13 AD3d 561 [2004]). There can be no deprivation ofeffective assistance of counsel arising from counsel's failure to make a motion which had little orno chance of success (see People v Terrell, 78 AD3d 865 [2d Dept 2010]; People vGoddard, 72 AD3d 839, 840 [2010]). The defendant received an advantageous plea, andnothing in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel (see People vFord, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; People v Hughes, 62 AD3d 1026 [2009]; Peoplev Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]; People v McKenzie, 4 AD3d 437, 438 [2004];People v Boodhoo, 191 AD2d 448, 449 [1993]).
Since the defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentencewhich was thereafter actually imposed, he has no basis now to complain that the sentence wasexcessive (see People v Hollingsworth, 74 AD3d 1359, 1360 [2010]; People vFlakes, 240 AD2d 428, 429 [1997]; People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816 [1984]). In anyevent, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see [*2]People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo,Hall and Roman, JJ., concur.