| People v Smith |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 05338 [208 AD3d 1369] |
| September 28, 2022 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Shaquan Smith, Appellant. |
Yasmin Daley Duncan, Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea ofcounsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County(Edward T. McLoughlin, J.), rendered September 15, 2021, convicting him of criminalpossession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlledsubstance in the third 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, andintelligent is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not move to withdraw hisplea on this ground or otherwise raise this issue before the County Court (see People v Pena, 204 AD3d940, 941 [2022]; People vArce, 196 AD3d 696, 697 [2021]). In any event, the contention is without merit.The fact that the defendant had a history of mental illness in the form of depression andanxiety did not trigger a duty by the court to inquire into his mental capacity (seePeople v Arce, 196 AD3d at 697; People Leasure, 177 AD3d 770, 772[2019]; People v Harris,166 AD3d 801 [2018]; cf.People v Patillo, 185 AD3d 46 [2020]).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he validly waived his right to appeal (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d545 [2019]; People vStevens, 203 AD3d 958, 959-960 [2022]). The defendant's valid waiver of theright to appeal precludes review of his contention that the sentence imposed wasexcessive (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d at 558; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d248, 255 [2006]). LaSalle, P.J., Miller, Genovesi and Wan, JJ., concur.