Opinion
2018–06997 Ind. No. 1415/16
08-28-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Latisha LARRYMORE, Appellant.
David Zucker, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant. John M. Ryan, Acting District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott, and Antara D. Kanth of counsel), for respondent.
David Zucker, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant.
John M. Ryan, Acting District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott, and Antara D. Kanth of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, SHERI S. ROMAN, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Michael Aloise, J.), rendered May 3, 2018, convicting her of conspiracy in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court improperly allowed the People to amend the indictment is without merit (see CPL 200.70[1] ). The amendment did not change the People's theory of the prosecution, and served simply to conform the indictment to the evidence presented to the grand jury (see People v. Jabbour , 73 A.D.3d 950, 950, 899 N.Y.S.2d 875 ; People v. Sommer , 265 A.D.2d 510, 510, 696 N.Y.S.2d 710 ; People v. Simmons , 212 A.D.2d 643, 644, 622 N.Y.S.2d 751 ). The defendant also has not shown that she was prejudiced by the amendment (see People v. Elie , 110 A.D.3d 1003, 1004, 973 N.Y.S.2d 358 ; People v. Daum , 278 A.D.2d 505, 505, 718 N.Y.S.2d 644 ).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record demonstrates that her plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Goldstein , 12 N.Y.3d 295, 301, 879 N.Y.S.2d 814, 907 N.E.2d 692 ; People v. Morocho , 129 A.D.3d 1107, 1107–1108, 11 N.Y.S.3d 684 ).
MASTRO, J.P., BALKIN, ROMAN and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.