From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Braswell

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 18, 2020
181 A.D.3d 818 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

2018–03028 Ind. No. 2494–15

03-18-2020

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Wayne BRASWELL, Appellant.

Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, N.Y. (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant. Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Elizabeth Miller of counsel), for respondent.


Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, N.Y. (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant.

Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Elizabeth Miller of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN HECTOR D. LASALLE ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered because the County Court failed to advise him, at the time of his plea, of the terms of an order of protection to be issued in favor of his wife is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2] ), and in any event, without merit (see People v. Valentin, 175 A.D.3d 1569, 106 N.Y.S.3d 898 ; People v. Margillo, 69 A.D.3d 655, 893 N.Y.S.2d 170 ).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, LASALLE and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Braswell

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 18, 2020
181 A.D.3d 818 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

People v. Braswell

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Wayne Braswell…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Mar 18, 2020

Citations

181 A.D.3d 818 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
118 N.Y.S.3d 427
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 1925

Citing Cases

People v. Taylor

" ‘The evidence provided relevant background material to enable the jury to understand the defendant's…

People v. Gilliam

The evidence had "substantial probative value" and was directly relevant to the nonpropensity issues of…