Opinion
October 11, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Allen Alpert, J.).
The court was not obligated to hold a hearing to determine whether defendant was competent to enter a plea, there being no indication that he was not competent (see, People v. Tinsley, 35 N.Y.2d 926). We reject his argument that his youth (17 years at the time of the plea) and inexperience with the criminal justice system raised a question of fact as to his competence.
Nor do we find merit to defendant's argument that his trial attorney did not provide him with meaningful representation by failing to advise the court of his age-based incompetency at the time of the plea. The record belies this assertion.
Finally, defendant's constitutional challenge to Penal Law § 30.00 is unpreserved (People v. Drummond, 40 N.Y.2d 990, 993, cert denied sub nom. New York v. Luis J., 431 U.S. 908), and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Were we to address it, we would find no merit to defendant's claim that reliance on chronological age constitutes arbitrary discrimination and violates the Due Process or Equal Protection Clauses of the Federal and State Constitutions (see, People v Killeen, 198 A.D.2d 233, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 926).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.