| People v Gantt |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 04316 [84 AD3d 1642] |
| May 26, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark Gantt,Appellant. |
—[*1] Andrew J. Wylie, District Attorney, Plattsburgh (Nicholas J. Evanovich of counsel), forrespondent.
Mercure, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Clinton County (Ryan, J.),rendered April 19, 2010, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of criminalcontempt in the first degree and stalking in the second degree.
Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal contempt in the first degree and stalking in the seconddegree. No specific sentence was promised as part of the plea agreement and County Courtthereafter sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 2 to 4 years inprison, with the sentences to run consecutively to a sentence on a prior conviction. Defendantnow appeals.
We affirm. Defendant's contention that his plea was not knowingly, intelligently andvoluntarily entered is not preserved for our review in light of his failure to move to withdraw hisplea or vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v Jenks, 69 AD3d 1120, 1121 [2010], lv denied14 NY3d 841 [2010]; People vGorrell, 63 AD3d 1381, 1381 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 744 [2009]).Moreover, the narrow exception to the preservation rule is inapplicable here, inasmuch asdefendant did not make any statements during the plea allocution that cast significant doubt onhis guilt or tended to negate a material element of the crimes (see People v Scribner, 77 AD3d 1022, 1023 [2010], lvdenied 16 NY3d 746 [2011]; People v Dantzler, 63 [*2]AD3d 1376, 1377 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 799 [2010]).Defendant's claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is similarly unpreserved,and reversal in the interest of justice is unwarranted. Accordingly, County Court's judgment isaffirmed.
Rose, Lahtinen, Kavanagh and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.