People v Ruben M.

[*1] People v Ruben M. 2015 NY Slip Op 51374(U) Decided on September 25, 2015 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on September 25, 2015
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Hunter, Jr., Ling-Cohan, JJ.
13-198

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Ruben M., Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Felicia A. Mennin, J., at plea, Diana M. Boyar, J. at sentencing), rendered November 13, 2012, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of petit larceny, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Felicia A. Mennin, J., at plea, Diana M. Boyar, J. at sentencing), rendered November 13, 2012, reversed, on the law, and accusatory instrument dismissed.

Defendant was charged in a misdemeanor complaint with petit larceny (see Penal Law § 155.25]) and criminal possession of stolen property (see Penal Law § 165.40), upon allegations that he shoplifted items from Macy's Department store. On February 11, 2011, defendant pled guilty to petit larceny in full satisfaction of the accusatory instrument, and was subsequently sentenced, as a youthful offender, to time served. The plea colloquy reflects that defendant accepted the People's plea offer; that defendant pled guilty to the charge; and that the court accepted defendant's plea without informing him of any of his constitutional rights under Boykin v Alabama (395 U.S. 238 [1969]).

Defendant's Boykin claims, reviewable on direct appeal in the circumstances presented (see People v Tyrell, 22 NY3d 359, 364 [2013]; People v Mones, 130 AD3d 1244 [2015]), are meritorious and mandate reversal. The record fails to demonstrate that defendant was informed of any of the pertinent constitutional rights that he was waiving by pleading guilty (see People v Tyrell, 22 NY3d at 366) or that he consulted with his attorney regarding the constitutional consequences of his guilty plea (id.; see People v Miller, 113 AD3d 573 [2014]).

Inasmuch as defendant has served his sentence, we dismiss the accusatory instrument in lieu of ordering a new trial (see People v Moore, 24 NY3d 1030, 1032 [2014]). In view of the foregoing, we need not address defendant's

remaining contention on appeal.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concurI concurI concur
Decision Date: September 25, 2015