People v. Mable

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed Michael Mable's judgment of conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree following his guilty plea. The court held that his challenge to the voluntariness of the plea was unpreserved, declined to review it in the interest of justice, and alternatively found no basis in the record to doubt the plea's voluntariness.

Holdings

1. Defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his guilty plea was unpreserved, and the court declined to review it in the interest of justice.
2. The narrow Lopez exception did not apply because defendant said nothing during the plea colloquy that raised the possibility of a defense or otherwise cast significant doubt on his guilt or the voluntariness of the plea.
3. Statements made in a presentence report do not trigger the narrow People v. Lopez exception to the preservation rule.
4. Alternatively, nothing in the record cast doubt on the voluntariness of defendant's guilty plea.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his guilty plea was preserved for appellate review.
2. Whether the narrow exception to the preservation rule for plea-colloquy statements casting significant doubt on guilt or voluntariness applied.
3. Whether statements in a presentence report could trigger the People v. Lopez exception.
4. Whether the record otherwise cast doubt on the voluntariness of defendant's guilty plea.

Disposition

affirmed