Opinion
106517.
02-11-2016
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Andrew J. SHIPPS, Appellant.
Robert D. Siglin, Elmira, for appellant. Weeden A. Wetmore, District Attorney, Elmira (Sophie J. Marmor of counsel), for respondent.
Robert D. Siglin, Elmira, for appellant.
Weeden A. Wetmore, District Attorney, Elmira (Sophie J. Marmor of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
McCARTHY, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Keene, J.), rendered October 7, 2013, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the second degree.
Defendant pleaded guilty to assault in the second degree. He was thereafter sentenced to two years in prison to be followed by two years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.
We affirm. Defendant's claim that his plea should be vacated due to County Court's failure to inquire as to a potential intoxication defense during the plea colloquy is not preserved for our review as the record does not indicate that he made an appropriate postallocution motion (see People v. Brown, 125 A.D.3d 1049, 1049, 2 N.Y.S.3d 699 2015; People v. Duggins, 114 A.D.3d 1001, 1001–1002, 979 N.Y.S.2d 877 2014, lvs. denied 23 N.Y.3d 961, 962, 988 N.Y.S.2d 568, 569, 11 N.E.3d 718, 719 2014 ). Further, contrary to defendant's contention, the narrow exception to the preservation rule is not applicable. Although at an earlier plea proceeding defendant informed County Court that he was “under the influence” when he committed the crime, County Court immediately adjourned the proceeding in order to provide defendant an opportunity to discuss a potential intoxication defense with counsel. Two weeks later, defendant returned and acknowledged that he had an opportunity to discuss his plea with counsel and pleaded guilty after affirming that he understood that he was waiving any potential defense to the charge. In light of the foregoing, County Court properly accepted defendant's guilty plea (see People v. Mead, 64 A.D.3d 814, 815, 882 N.Y.S.2d 738 2009, lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 890, 903 N.Y.S.2d 778, 929 N.E.2d 1013 2010; People v. Reid, 21 A.D.3d 1215, 1216, 801 N.Y.S.2d 437 2005 ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
PETERS, P.J., ROSE and LYNCH, JJ., concur.