| People v DeJesus |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 05205 [96 AD3d 1295] |
| June 28, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Edward R.DeJesus, Appellant. |
—[*1] Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), forrespondent.
McCarthy, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Cawley, J.),rendered March 4, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminalcontempt in the first degree.
Defendant waived indictment and pleaded guilty to a superior court information charginghim with criminal contempt in the first degree for violating an order of protection. County Courtsentenced him to nine months in jail. Defendant now appeals.
We affirm. Inasmuch as the record before us does not indicate that defendant moved towithdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, his challenge to the voluntariness of hisplea has not been preserved for our review and defendant made no statements that wouldimplicate the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v Stewart, 92 AD3d1146, 1147 [2012]; People vTeele, 92 AD3d 972, 972 [2012]). In any event, County Court engaged in a lengthy,detailed colloquy with defendant regarding the rights he was relinquishing and the possibleconsequences of his plea, including deportation. Likewise, defendant's claim of ineffectiveassistance of counsel, to the extent that it impacted the voluntariness of his plea, is unpreservedby the lack of evidence in the record that he has moved to withdraw the plea or vacate thejudgment of conviction (see People vCarpenter, 93 AD3d 950, 952 [2012], lv denied [*2]19 NY3d 863 [2012]; People v Benson, 87 AD3d 1228, 1228-1229 [2011]).Notwithstanding, his claim that counsel pressured him into pleading guilty without adequatelyexploring potential defenses involves matters outside the record and is, therefore, moreappropriately the subject of a CPL article 440 motion (see People v Davis, 84 AD3d 1645, 1646 n [2011], lvdenied 17 NY3d 815 [2011]; Peoplev Pendelton, 81 AD3d 1037, 1038-1039 [2011], lv denied 16 NY3d 898[2011]). Defendant's remaining contention, that his sentence was harsh and excessive, has beenexamined and found to be without merit.
Mercure, J.P., Kavanagh, Stein and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.