| People v Colon |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 03873 [106 AD3d 1367] |
| May 30, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vTimothy Colon, Appellant. |
—[*1] Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Gerald A. Dwyer of counsel), forrespondent.
Lahtinen, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County(Giardino, J.), rendered October 7, 2010, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty ofthe crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree andcriminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the thirddegree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and waived his right toappeal. Pursuant to the plea agreement, he was sentenced as a second felony offender toan aggregate prison term of nine years, to be followed by five years of postreleasesupervision. He now appeals.
We affirm. The record contains no indication that defendant moved to withdraw hisplea or to vacate the judgment of conviction and, accordingly, his contention that his pleawas coerced is unpreserved for our review (see People v Morelli, 46 AD3d 1215, 1216 [2007], lvdenied 10 NY3d 814 [2008]; People v Lambe, 282 AD2d 776, 777 [2001]).County Court did not, in any event, engage in coercive conduct by advising defendant ofthe evidence against him, the uncertainty inherent in proceeding to trial, and hissentencing exposure under the indictment (see id.).[*2]
To the extent that defendant's further claim thathe received the ineffective assistance of counsel implicates the voluntary nature of hisguilty plea and survives his valid appeal waiver, it is similarly unpreserved absent anyindication that he made an appropriate postallocution motion (see People v Walton, 101AD3d 1489, 1490 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1105 [2013]; People v Aitken, 101 AD3d1383, 1384 [2012]). We would, regardless, determine from the record before us thatdefendant received meaningful representation.
Rose, J.P., Spain and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.