Opinion
2014-01-23
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John F. MacDONALD, Appellant.
Norbert A. Higgins, Binghamton, for appellant. Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Brian Leeds of counsel), for respondent.
Norbert A. Higgins, Binghamton, for appellant. Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Brian Leeds of counsel), for respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., LAHTINEN, STEIN and EGAN JR., JJ.
LAHTINEN, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Cawley, J.), rendered August 30, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the third degree (two counts).
In satisfaction of a six-count indictment and other pending misdemeanor charges, defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of burglary in the third degree and was sentenced as a second felony offender to 2 to 4 years in prison on each count, the sentences to run concurrently with each other and with the sentences imposed in another case. On this appeal, he challenges the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution. However, he has failed to establish that his argument has been preserved for our review by a motion to withdraw his plea or vacate his judgment of conviction ( see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5 [1988]; People v. Johnson, 54 A.D.3d 1133, 1133, 864 N.Y.S.2d 219 [2008] ). Nor does the narrow exception to the preservation requirement apply, as defendant made no statements during the plea allocution that cast doubt upon his guilt or the voluntariness of his plea, or negated a material element of the crime ( see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d at 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5; People v. Johnson, 54 A.D.3d at 1133, 864 N.Y.S.2d 219). Contrary to defendant's assertion, County Court was not required to “elicit from ... defendant specific admissions as to each element of the charged crime[s]” (People v. Goldstein, 12 N.Y.3d 295, 301, 879 N.Y.S.2d 814, 907 N.E.2d 692 [2009]; see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d at 666 n., 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. PETERS, P.J., STEIN and EGAN JR., JJ., concur.