| People v Squitieri |
| 2018 NY Slip Op 00443 [157 AD3d 911] |
| January 24, 2018 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Vincent Squitieri, Also Known as Vincent Squitteri,Appellant. |
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (William Kastin of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel ofcounsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (WilliamMiller, J.), rendered January 6, 2016, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree,upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant claims that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligentbecause the Supreme Court failed to make further inquiry when his allocution raised thepossibility of the existence of an affirmative defense to the crime of attempted robbery in the firstdegree (see Penal Law § 160.15 [4]). Contrary to the People's contention,the defendant's claim was not waived by any valid waiver of his right to appeal, since the claimimplicates the voluntariness of the defendant's plea (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10[1989]; People v Lovick, 127 AD3d1108, 1108-1109 [2015]). However, the claim is unpreserved for appellate review, and thenarrow exception to the preservation rule is inapplicable (see People v Smith, 43 AD3d 474, 475 [2007]; People v Sandson, 6 AD3d 632[2004]; People v Willingham, 194 AD2d 703 [1993]). In any event, reduction of thedefendant's conviction, upon his plea of guilty, to a lesser-included offense, which is the onlyrelief requested on appeal, would not be a lawful remedy because the People do not consent to it(see CPL 220.10 [4]; People v Rafael, 243 AD2d 277 [1997]; People vHough, 176 AD2d 964, 964-965 [1991]; People v Vaughn, 119 AD2d 779[1986]).
Accordingly, the judgment must be affirmed. Hall, J.P., Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Iannacci,JJ., concur.