People v Galarza (Marcos)

Annotate this Case
[*1] People v Galarza (Marcos) 2019 NY Slip Op 50161(U) Decided on February 13, 2019 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on February 13, 2019
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Ling-Cohan, J.P., Gonzalez, Cooper, JJ.
570631/17

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Marcos Galarza, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Curtis Farber, J.), rendered September 12, 2017, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the third degree, attempted criminal contempt in the second degree,

and attempted criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation, and imposing sentence.


Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Curtis Farber, J.), rendered September 12, 2017, affirmed.

Our review of the record indicates that defendant's guilty plea was entered knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily with the aid of counsel, and after the court sufficiently advised defendant of the constitutional rights he would be giving up by pleading guilty (see People v Conceicao, 26 NY3d 375 [2015]; People v Sougou, 26 NY3d 1052 [2015]). Contrary to defendant's present contention, nothing in the plea allocution record, in which defendant admitted that he had violated an order of protection by attempting to place his hands around the victim's neck, negated any element of the attempted criminal contempt charge to which he pleaded or triggered a duty to inquire into a potential defense (see People v Roberson, 161 AD3d 544 [2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 940 [2018]; People v Fiallo, 6 AD3d 176, 177 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 640 [2004]; see also People v Velez, 138 AD3d 418 [2016], lv denied 27 NY3d 1140 [2016]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.


I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: February 13, 2019

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.