| People v Spencer |
| 2017 NY Slip Op 08700 [156 AD3d 731] |
| December 13, 2017 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Charlene Spencer, 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 (Forman,J.), rendered October 6, 2015, as amended October 8, 2015, convicting her of assault in thesecond degree (two counts), upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
The defendant was charged with certain crimes based on allegations that she assaulted herchildren in June 2014. The defendant claimed that she could not recall the events in question as aresult of a blackout resulting from either alcohol abuse or posttraumatic stress disorder. Sheagreed to enter an Alford plea of guilty (see North Carolina v Alford, 400 US 25[1970]) to two counts of assault in the second degree, and explicitly waived the defense ofintoxication (see People v Braman, 136 AD2d 382 [1988]). Defense counsel noted thatan Alford plea, which would not require the defendant to admit her guilt, wasrecommended based upon a mental health evaluation of the defendant which indicated that shesuffered from extreme posttraumatic stress disorder from domestic and sexual abuse when shewas a teenager, and also suffered from substance abuse, including alcohol abuse, which couldhave caused her to black out and be unable to remember "all the events that occurred." Thedefendant acknowledged that the "People have established sufficient evidence to prove" her guilt.No request was made for an examination as to whether the defendant was competent toproceed.
A defendant is incompetent to proceed if the defendant "as a result of mental disease ordefect lacks capacity to understand the proceedings against him [or her] or to assist in his [or her]own defense" (CPL 730.10 [1]). A defendant is presumed competent, and mental health issuesstanding alone are generally not sufficient to trigger a duty to inquire as to the defendant'scompetency (see People v Batista,82 AD3d 1113, 1114 [2011]). Here, the defendant's responses during the plea and sentenceproceedings were appropriate and did not indicate that she was incapacitated (see id. at114; People v Gallo, 73 AD3d804, 805 [2010]). The record demonstrates that her plea of guilty was voluntary (seePeople v Francabandera, 33 NY2d 429, 434 [1974]; People v Douglas, 139 Misc 2d241 [Sup Ct, Bronx County 1988], citing Wilson v United States, 391 F2d 460 [DC Cir1968]).
[*2] Defense counsel negotiated a favorable pleaagreement whereby the defendant avoided consecutive sentences, and received a sentence ofthree years in prison, which was the statutory minimum for a second felony offender who isbeing sentenced for a class D violent felony offense (see Penal Law former§ 70.06 [6] [c]). There is no indication on this record that counsel was ineffective(see People v Honghirun, 29 NY3d284, 289 [2017]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Austin, J.P., Sgroi, Hinds-Radixand Iannacci, JJ., concur.