| People v Andrea |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 05979 [98 AD3d 627] |
| August 15, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v DeanR. Andrea, Appellant. |
—[*1] Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Marion M. Tang of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Condon, J.),rendered February 10, 2011, convicting him of criminal mischief in the second degree, upon hisplea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, voluntarily, andintelligently made is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to withdraw hisplea on this ground prior to the imposition of sentence (see CPL 220.60 [3]; 470.05 [2];People v Clarke, 93 NY2d 904, 906 [1999]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665[1988]; People v Hayes, 91 AD3d792 [2012]; People vKulmatycski, 83 AD3d 734, 735 [2011]; People v Rusielewicz, 45 AD3d 704 [2007]). In any event, thedefendant acknowledged at the plea proceeding that he understood the sentencing promise. Therecord reveals that the defendant agreed to the plea bargain and did so voluntarily, with a fullappreciation of the consequences thereof, and upon the competent advice of counsel (see People v Bookard, 68 AD3d1128, 1129 [2009]).
To the extent that the defendant contends that ineffective assistance of counsel affected thevoluntariness of his plea, the record demonstrates that he pleaded guilty to the top count in theindictment in exchange for the minimum indeterminate sentence of imprisonment authorized bylaw, which was executed as a sentence of parole supervision, and nothing in the record castsdoubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel (see CPL 410.91; People v Duah, 91 AD3d 884, 885[2012]; People v Yarborough, 83AD3d 875 [2011]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Belen andAustin, JJ., concur.