| People v Cantoni |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 08262 [112 AD3d 733] |
| December 11, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Gregory Cantoni, Appellant. |
—[*1] Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Sarah S. Rabinowitz and JosephMogelnicki of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County(Sullivan, J.), rendered January 7, 2011, convicting him of robbery in the third degree(two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up forreview the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motionwhich was to suppress identification testimony.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly declined to suppress the proffered identificationtestimony. "A photographic display is suggestive when some characteristic of one picturedraws the viewer's attention to it, indicating that the police have made a particularselection" (People v Miller,33 AD3d 728, 728-729 [2006]). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the subjectsdepicted in the array were sufficiently similar in appearance, and there was no substantiallikelihood that the defendant would be singled out for identification.
Upon consideration of the factors in People v Taranovich (37 NY2d 442,445 [1975]), we find that the defendant was not deprived of his constitutional right to aspeedy trial. Further, by pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited his claim that hisstatutory right to a speedy trial was violated (see People v O'Brien, 56 NY2d1009 [1982]; People vBurke, 90 AD3d 1246 [2011]; People v Douglas, 46 AD3d 698 [2007]).
The defendant's contention that his plea was not voluntary is unpreserved forappellate review because he did not seek to withdraw his plea or otherwise raise thisissue before the Supreme Court (see People v Bevins, 27 AD3d 572 [2006]). In any event,the defendant's plea of guilty was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently(see People v Garcia, 92 NY2d 869 [1998]; People v Grant, 61 AD3d 177 [2009]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.P., Lott, Austinand Roman, JJ., concur.