Opinion
11-09-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Curtis T. KING, Defendant–Appellant.
Mark D. Funk, Conflict Defender, Rochester (Kathleen P. Reardon of counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Leah R. Mervine of counsel), for Respondent.
Mark D. Funk, Conflict Defender, Rochester (Kathleen P. Reardon of counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Leah R. Mervine of counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal sexual act in the first degree ( Penal Law § 130.50[4] ). Defendant's challenge to County Court's order compelling him to provide a buccal swab for DNA analysis is forfeited by his guilty plea (see People v. Smith, 138 A.D.3d 1415, 1416, 29 N.Y.S.3d 726 [4th Dept.2016] ; see generally People v. Hansen, 95 N.Y.2d 227, 230–232, 715 N.Y.S.2d 369, 738 N.E.2d 773 [2000] ). Contrary to defendant's further contention, we conclude that the negotiated sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, DeJOSEPH, NEMOYER, and CURRAN, JJ., concur.