People v Elting
2017 NY Slip Op 04456 [151 AD3d 739]
June 7, 2017
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 2, 2017


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Shazique C. Elting, Appellant.

Del Atwell, East Hampton, NY, for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel),for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Greller, J.),rendered June 10, 2015, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in thesecond degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligentbecause the allocution was factually insufficient is unpreserved for appellate review, since he didnot move to withdraw his plea on this ground prior to the imposition of sentence (see People v Telfair, 144 AD3d712, 712 [2016]; People vBallard, 112 AD3d 731, 732 [2013]). Moreover, the exception to the preservationrequirement does not apply here because the defendant's plea allocution did not cast significantdoubt on his guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntarinessof his plea (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]; People v Sanchez, 122 AD3d 646,646 [2014]; People v McKenzie, 98AD3d 749, 750 [2012]; People vJohnson, 73 AD3d 951, 951 [2010]). In any event, the record establishes that the pleawas entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82NY2d 536, 543 [1993]). Further, inasmuch as the defendant pleaded guilty to a lesser crime thanthe crime charged in the indictment, and since the allocution establishes that the defendantunderstood the charges against him, a factual basis for the plea was unnecessary (see People v Johnson, 23 NY3d973, 975 [2014]; People v Moore, 71 NY2d 1002, 1006 [1988]; People vSanchez, 122 AD3d at 647; People v McKenzie, 98 AD3d at 750).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance ofcounsel (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712-713 [1998]; People v Baldi,54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).Mastro, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.