Opinion
KA 00-01272
June 14, 2002.
Appeal from a judgment of Ontario County Court (Doran, J.), entered May 10, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree.
DAVID R. MORABITO, EAST ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
R. MICHAEL TANTILLO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (JAMES B. RITTS OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., HAYES, KEHOE, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree (Penal Law former § 130.75 [a]) and sentencing him to a determinate term of imprisonment of 10 years with a five-year period of postrelease supervision. By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his contentions that the indictment is duplicitous and lacks factual specificity ( see People v. Gerber, 182 A.D.2d 252, 266, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 1026; see also People v. Lynch, 267 A.D.2d 405, 405-406, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 922). He also forfeited his contention that the People failed to comply with CPL 710.30 by failing to provide adequate notice of their intention to use defendant's statements at trial ( see People v. Taylor, 65 N.Y.2d 1, 3, 6-7; People v. Rodriguez, 270 A.D.2d 956, 957, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 870; see also People v. Khan, 291 A.D.2d 898).
County Court properly denied the motion of defendant to suppress his statements. Contrary to the contention of defendant, the record establishes that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his Miranda rights ( see People v. Engert, 263 A.D.2d 959, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 1017; see generally People v. Williams, 62 N.Y.2d 285, 288-289). By failing to move to withdraw the plea of guilty or vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contentions that the plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered ( see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665; People v. Burke, 288 A.D.2d 875, 875-876, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 702; People v. Wright, 288 A.D.2d 899, 899, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 689; People v. Robertson, 286 A.D.2d 863). In any event, those contentions lack merit ( see Robertson, 286 A.D.2d 863; People v. Bradley, 266 A.D.2d 466, 466-467, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 901). In addition, by failing to move to withdraw the plea of guilty or vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the guilty plea and sentence must be vacated and the indictment dismissed because the court failed to advise him at the time of his guilty plea that he would be subject to a period of postrelease supervision ( see CPL 470.05).