| People v Persaud |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 05704 [109 AD3d 626] |
| August 21, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Eric J. Persaud, Appellant. |
—[*1] Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano andMerri Turk Lasky of counsel; Andrew Dykens on the brief), for respondent.
Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County(Lasak, J.), both rendered March 16, 2011, convicting him of assault in the first degreeunder indictment No. 1599/09 and bribing a witness under indictment No. 721/10, uponhis pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
Although a claim that a plea of guilty was not voluntary survives a valid waiver ofthe right to appeal (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]), the defendantfailed to preserve for appellate review his contention that his plea of guilty to assault inthe first degree was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent because the Supreme Court didnot make a further inquiry when his allocution raised the possibility that the defendant'salleged intoxication at the time of the assault would negate the intent element of thecrime of assault in the first degree (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 668[1988]; People v Antoine,59 AD3d 560 [2009]). In any event, contrary to the defendant's contention, the courtproperly conducted a further inquiry to ensure that he possessed the necessary criminalintent to inflict serious physical injury (see Penal Law § 120.10 [1]), thatthere was no possibility that his ability to form such intent was negated by intoxication,and that his plea of guilty to assault in the first degree was knowingly, voluntarily, andintelligently entered (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d at 667-668; People v Alonzo, 90 AD3d1065 [2011]; People vMead, 27 AD3d 767, 767-768 [2006]).
The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his contentionthat the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d248, 255-256 [2006]; cf.People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264-267 [2011]). Dillon, J.P., Chambers,Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.