Opinion
5140 Ind. 629/13
12-05-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Hector LEBRON, Defendant–Appellant.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Christina Wong of counsel), for appellant. Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Nicole Neckles of counsel), for respondent.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Christina Wong of counsel), for appellant.
Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Nicole Neckles of counsel), for respondent.
Richter, J.P., Manzanet–Daniels, Andrias, Kern, Singh, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert E. Torres, J.), rendered December 16, 2015, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 18 years, unanimously affirmed.
Even if we assume that defense counsel's highly ambiguous remarks constituted adoption of defendant's pro se constitutional speedy trial motion (see People v. Rodriguez, 95 N.Y.2d 497, 501–03, 719 N.Y.S.2d 208, 741 N.E.2d 882 [2000] ), appellate review of this issue is foreclosed because defendant pleaded guilty while the motion remained undecided (see e.g. People v. Capellan, 142 A.D.3d 923, 37 N.Y.S.3d 889 [1st Dept. 2016 ], lv. denied 28 N.Y.3d 1123, 51 N.Y.S.3d 20, 73 N.E.3d 360 [2016] ). Defendant's arguments concerning whether he made a knowing and intentional waiver are misplaced, because he forfeited review "by operation of law as soon as he pleaded guilty" ( People v. Alexander, 19 N.Y.3d 203, 219, 947 N.Y.S.2d 386, 970 N.E.2d 409 [2012] ).
In any event, defendant's failure to provide this Court with transcripts of the relevant court appearances renders his constitutional speedy trial claim unreviewable for that reason as well (see e.g. People v. Thomas, 128 A.D.3d 440, 9 N.Y.S.3d 38 [1st Dept. 2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 1208, 16 N.Y.S.3d 530, 37 N.E.3d 1173 [2015] ). In particular, "these minutes are necessary because of their bearing on the critical issue of the reasons for the delay" ( id. at 440, 9 N.Y.S.3d 38 ). To the extent that the present record permits review, defendant has not established a violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial (see People v. Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442, 445, 373 N.Y.S.2d 79, 335 N.E.2d 303 [1975] ).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.