| People v McGowan |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 03308 [117 AD3d 1202] |
| May 8, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vLenworth McGowan, Appellant. |
Christopher Shambo, Ballston Spa, for appellant.
James A. Murphy III, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Nicholas E. Tishler ofcounsel), for respondent.
McCarthy, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County(Scarano, J.), rendered October 22, 2012, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty ofthe crime of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
In satisfaction of a 17-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to one count ofattempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentencedpursuant to the terms of the plea agreement to two years in prison followed by two yearsof postrelease supervision. His current argument that his guilty plea was involuntary waspreserved by his unsuccessful motion to withdraw his plea and survives his valid appealwaiver (see People vCarbone, 101 AD3d 1232, 1233 [2012]; People v Shurock, 83 AD3d 1342, 1343 [2011]); however,it is without merit. The record reveals that defendant unequivocally acknowledged thathe understood the consequences of pleading guilty and, by his affirmative responses toCounty Court's inquiries, freely admitted committing the crime to which he was pleadingguilty (see People v Davis,84 AD3d 1645, 1646 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 815 [2011]; People vShurock, 83 AD3d at 1343). Furthermore, while defendant's claim of ineffectiverepresentation survives his appeal waiver to the extent that such representation mighthave affected the voluntariness of his plea, defendant's argument that counsel pressuredhim during certain conversations to accept the plea offer involves matters outside therecord and is thus more properly raised in a CPL article 440 motion (see People v DeJesus, 96AD3d 1295, 1295-1296 [2012]; People v [*2]Pendelton, 81AD3d 1037, 1038-1039 [2011], lv denied 16 NY3d 898 [2011]). In all otherrespects, the record reflects that defendant received meaningful representation,culminating in a very favorable plea bargain (see People v Shurock, 83 AD3d at1344; People v Chaney, 70AD3d 1251, 1252-1253 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 748 [2010]).
Lahtinen, J.P., Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.