| People v Green |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 02085 [82 AD3d 1453] |
| March 24, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v DaymoneGreen, Appellant. |
—[*1] Kathleen B. Hogan, District Attorney, Lake George (Emilee B. Davenport of counsel), forrespondent.
Peters, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Warren County (Hall, Jr., J.),rendered November 4, 2009, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes ofcriminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlledsubstance in the third degree.
Defendant was charged in an indictment with numerous drug-related offenses. He pleadedguilty to one count each of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree andcriminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon the understanding that hewould receive an aggregate prison sentence of seven years to be followed by two years ofpostrelease supervision. While he was offered a shorter prison term of five years if he waived hisright to appeal, he initially rejected that offer. He then moved to withdraw his guilty plea. CountyCourt denied defendant's motion, but allowed him to execute an appeal waiver and imposed anaggregate prison sentence of five years to be followed by two years of postrelease supervision.
Defendant now appeals and argues that his guilty plea was not knowingly, voluntarily andintelligently entered. Although such a challenge "survives his appeal waiver and is preserved dueto his motion to withdraw the plea" (People v Johnson, 77 AD3d 986, 986 [2010], lv denied[*2]16 NY3d 743 [2011]; see People v Ortiz, 69 AD3d 966, 967 [2010]), we neverthelessfind it to be unpersuasive. Defendant contends that he was under a great deal of stress at the timehe pleaded guilty and did not understand the terms of the plea agreement. During the pleacolloquy, however, he was advised at length as to the terms of the agreement and the rights hewas giving up by pleading guilty. Defendant expressed no concerns in response, instead assuringCounty Court that he understood his rights and was proceeding freely, had consulted and wassatisfied with defense counsel, and admitted his guilt. The record thus demonstrates thatdefendant's guilty plea was in all respects knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v Shovah, 67 AD3d1257, 1258 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 773 [2010]; People v Quinones, 51 AD3d1226, 1227 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 938 [2008]).
Lahtinen, Malone Jr., Kavanagh and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.