Majority
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro,
The court properly denied defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. There is nothing in the record to cast doubt on the voluntariness of the plea. The plea allocution minutes establish that the court advised defendant of the 20-year post-release supervision component of his sentence, and that defense counsel had thoroughly explained to her client the terms of the plea, including the PRS term, in conversations both in prison and at court. Accordingly, defendant’s vague complaint that PRS had not been explained to him with sufficient precision did not warrant a hearing, and the court’s limited inquiry was permissible (see People v Mitchell, 21 NY3d 964 , 967 [2013]; People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520 [1978]), given that the consequences of violating PRS are merely collateral (People v Monk, 21 NY3d 27 , 32 [2013]). Defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal (see People v Caviness, 95 AD3d 622 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 995 [2012]), which forecloses review of his remaining arguments. Regardless of whether defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the term of postrelease supervision.
Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Acosta, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Cases cited
- People v. Mitchell 21 NY3d 964 at 967 p. 524
- People v. Frederick 45 NY2d 520 p. 524
- People v. Monk 21 NY3d 27 at 32 p. 524