| People v Pazmini |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 07860 [132 AD3d 1015] |
| October 28, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Kevin Pazmini, Appellant. |
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Tammy Linn of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano,Johnnette Traill, and Kayonia L. Whetstone of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County(Buchter, J.), rendered June 12, 2013, convicting him of criminal sexual act in the firstdegree, attempted rape in the first degree, assault in the second degree, and attemptedrobbery in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that his waiverof the right to a jury trial was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see CPL470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 51 NY2d 986, 987-988 [1980]; People v Petitbrun, 123 AD3d1057, 1058 [2014]; Peoplev Butler, 17 AD3d 379, 380 [2005]; People v Lumpkins, 11 AD3d 563, 564 [2004]). In anyevent, the record does not support the defendant's contention that the waiver was invalid.The defendant executed a written waiver in open court after allocution by the court, thetrial justice approved the waiver, and the circumstances surrounding the waiversupported the Supreme Court's determination that the waiver was made knowingly,voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Silva, 91 AD3d 675, 675 [2012]; People v Fani, 59 AD3d460, 460 [2009]).
The defendant also failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that theSupreme Court, by the sentence it imposed after trial, penalized him for exercising hisright to a trial (see People vMurray, 116 AD3d 1068, 1069 [2014]; People v Lerner, 116 AD3d 1065, 1067 [2014]; People v Seymore, 106 AD3d1033, 1034 [2013]). In any event, there is no indication in the record that thesentence was the result of vindictiveness or retribution for refusing a plea offer andexercising his right to a trial.
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80[1982]). Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.