People v Goforth

Annotate this Case
People v Goforth 2014 NY Slip Op 07841 Decided on November 14, 2014 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 14, 2014 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND VALENTINO, JJ.
1101 KA 13-01490

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

MATTHEW GOFORTH, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Wyoming County Court (Mark H. Dadd, J.), rendered June 10, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the third degree.



THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (TIMOTHY P. MURPHY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

DONALD G. O'GEEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WARSAW (VINCENT A. HEMMING OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his contention that County Court should have dismissed the indictment because the prosecutor failed to introduce exculpatory evidence before the grand jury (see People v Crumpler, 70 AD3d 1396, 1397, lv denied 14 NY3d 839). Defendant's further contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel "does not survive his plea of guilty inasmuch as [t]here is no showing that the plea bargaining process was infected by any allegedly ineffective assistance or that defendant entered the plea because of his attorney['s] allegedly poor performance' " (People v Fomby, 42 AD3d 894, 895; see People v Jackson, 99 AD3d 1240, 1240, lv denied 20 NY3d 987).

Entered: November 14, 2014

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.