Opinion
10-05-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ruben RODRIGUEZ, Appellant.
Theodore J. Stein, Woodstock, for appellant. D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.
Theodore J. Stein, Woodstock, for appellant.
D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.
Before: McCARTHY, J.P., EGAN JR., LYNCH, DEVINE AND PRITZKER, JJ.
McCARTHY, J.P.In satisfaction of a five-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to burglary in the first degree and waived his right to appeal. In accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, he was sentenced as a second felony offender to 16 years in prison to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.
Defendant contends that his conviction is against the weight of the evidence because there was no proof that he entered a dwelling armed with a deadly weapon. Inasmuch as defendant's conviction was the result of a guilty plea and not a trial, he is essentially challenging the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution. He is, however, precluded from doing so by his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Zakrzewski, 140 A.D.3d 1536, 1537, 33 N.Y.S.3d 782 [2016] ; People v. Blair, 140 A.D.3d 1478, 1479, 35 N.Y.S.3d 508 [2016], lv. denied 28 N.Y.3d 927, 40 N.Y.S.3d 355, 63 N.E.3d 75 [2016] ). In addition, his claim has not been preserved for our review as the record does not disclose that he made an appropriate postallocution motion, and the exception to the preservation requirement is inapplicable given that defendant did not make any statements that cast doubt upon his guilt (see People v. Blair, 140 A.D.3d at 1479, 35 N.Y.S.3d 508 ; People v. Larock, 139 A.D.3d 1241, 1242, 31 N.Y.S.3d 665 [2016], lv. denied 28 N.Y.3d 932, 40 N.Y.S.3d 360, 63 N.E.3d 80 [2016] ). Finally, defendant's contention is belied by the record as he admitted during the plea colloquy that he unlawfully entered a dwelling and possessed a loaded gun at the time of the crime. Therefore, the judgment must be affirmed.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
EGAN JR., LYNCH, DEVINE and PRITZKER, JJ., concur.