| People v Praileau |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 06298 [110 AD3d 415] |
| October 1, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Derrick Praileau, Appellant. |
—[*1] Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Ellen Stanfield Friedman ofcounsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered June 17,2011, as amended June 27, 2011, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, ofmurder in the first and second degrees and attempted rape in the first degree, andsentencing him to an aggregate term of 23 years to life, unanimously affirmed.
Because defendant never moved to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate thejudgment, his challenge to the voluntariness of his plea is unpreserved, and we decline toreview it in the interest of justice (see e.g. People v Negron, 222 AD2d327 [1st Dept 1995], lv denied 88 NY2d 882 [1996]). The narrow exception tothe preservation rule (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]) does notapply here, because nothing in the plea allocution cast any doubt on defendant's guilt.
As an alternative holding, we reject his argument on the merits. The plea allocutionrecord establishes the voluntariness of the plea. "[D]efendant said nothing aboutintoxication in his plea allocution itself, regardless of what he may have said on otheroccasions" (People vWilson, 107 AD3d 532, 532 [1st Dept 2013]), and the court was "not requiredto make a sua sponte inquiry regarding defendant's mention of intoxication" at otherjunctures (People v Fiallo, 6AD3d 176, 177 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 640 [2004]). In any event, there isnothing in the [*2]record to suggest that defendant'sintoxication rendered him unable to form the requisite intent to commit murder and rape(see generally Penal Law § 15.25). Concur—Friedman, J.P.,Moskowitz, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.