People v Sandford
2019 NY Slip Op 04423 [173 AD3d 777]
June 5, 2019
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, July 31, 2019


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
James Sandford III, Appellant.

Gary E. Eisenberg, New City, 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 (Stephen L.Greller, J.), rendered March 22, 2011, convicting him of aggravated criminal contempt, upon hisplea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing,of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We agree with the County Court's determination to deny that branch of the defendant'somnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence seized from the defendant's house. Thepolice were presented with an emergency situation that justified a warrantless entry into thehouse (see People v Rossi, 99 AD3d947, 949 [2012], affd 24 NY3d 968 [2014]; People v Rodriguez, 77 AD3d 280, 288-289 [2010]).

The defendant's challenge to the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution is unpreserved forappellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725, 726 [1995];People v Jackson, 111 AD3d960, 961 [2013]). Contrary to the defendant's contention, the exception to the preservationrequirement does not apply here because the defendant's allocution did not cast significant doubton his guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of hisplea (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]; People v Barrett, 105 AD3d 862, 863 [2013]). In any event, thefacts the defendant admitted during his plea allocution were sufficient to establish the elementsof the crime of aggravated criminal contempt (see Penal Law § 215.52[1]).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit. Rivera, J.P., Roman, Hinds-Radixand LaSalle, 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.