Opinion
2017–11720 Ind.No. 610/12
03-06-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Modesto MANZANALES, Appellant.
Judah Maltz, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Laurie K. Gibbons of counsel; Matthew C. Frankel on the brief), for respondent.
Judah Maltz, Kew Gardens, NY, for appellant.
Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Laurie K. Gibbons of counsel; Matthew C. Frankel on the brief), for respondent.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, ROBERT J. MILLER, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent. Since this issue would survive a valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Seaberg , 74 N.Y.2d 1, 10, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968, 541 N.E.2d 1022 ; People v. Camarda , 138 A.D.3d 884, 885, 29 N.Y.S.3d 511 ; People v. Ferguson , 113 A.D.3d 874, 874, 979 N.Y.S.2d 389 ), we do not consider the validity of the defendant's purported appeal waiver. The defendant's contention concerning the validity of the plea of guilty is, nonetheless, without merit. The Supreme Court expressly advised the defendant of the rights that he was waiving by pleading guilty, and the record affirmatively demonstrates the defendant's understanding and waiver of those rights (see People v. Camarda , 138 A.D.3d at 885, 29 N.Y.S.3d 511 ).
Although the record reflects that the defendant had a history of mental impairment, his responses during the plea proceeding were coherent and appropriate, and there is no basis in the record to support a conclusion that, at the time of the plea proceeding, the defendant lacked an understanding of the nature or the consequences of his plea of guilty (see People v. DeBenedetto , 120 A.D.3d 1428, 1429, 992 N.Y.S.2d 370 ; People v. Brooks , 89 A.D.3d 747, 747–748, 931 N.Y.S.2d 908 ; People v. Rodriguez , 83 A.D.3d 449, 920 N.Y.S.2d 341 ). To the extent that the defendant relies on events subsequent to the judgment of conviction and a subsequent psychological evaluation to support his argument on appeal, that material is dehors the record and may not be considered on a direct appeal from the judgment (see People v. Stevens , 162 A.D.3d 1077, 1078, 75 N.Y.S.3d 539 ; People v. King , 161 A.D.3d 772, 775, 77 N.Y.S.3d 70 ; People v. Bethea , 159 A.D.3d 710, 713, 71 N.Y.S.3d 589 ; People v. Geritano , 158 A.D.3d 724, 725, 71 N.Y.S.3d 531 ).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record also reflects that, before accepting the defendant's plea, the Supreme Court properly advised the defendant that a plea of guilty could lead to deportation or the denial of naturalization (see People v. Peque , 22 N.Y.3d 168, 176, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617 ), and confirmed that the defendant had had sufficient opportunity to consult with counsel and was satisfied with counsel's representation (cf. People v. May , 138 A.D.3d 1146, 1146, 30 N.Y.S.3d 327 ).
AUSTIN, J.P., ROMAN, MILLER and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.