| People v McClinton |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 04517 [118 AD3d 915] |
| June 18, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Charles McClinton, Appellant. |
Matthew Muraskin, Port Jefferson, N.Y., for appellant.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Edward A. Bannan of counsel),for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County(Toomey, J.), rendered December 14, 2012, convicting him of attempted criminalpossession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, andimposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
As the People correctly concede, the defendant's waiver of his right to appeal was notknowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 265 [2011]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d248 [2006]).
However, the defendant's challenge to the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution isunpreserved for appellate review since the defendant did not move to withdraw his pleaon this ground prior to sentencing (see CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Clarke,93 NY2d 904 [1999]; People vLujan, 114 AD3d 963 [2014]; People v Ovalle, 112 AD3d 971 [2013]). Furthermore,contrary to the defendant's contention, the exception to the preservation requirement doesnot apply here, since the defendant's plea allocution did not cast significant doubt uponhis guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntarinessof the plea (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). In any event, thedefendant's contention is without merit. Dickerson, J.P., Leventhal, Hall and Miller, JJ.,concur.