People v. Stephenson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department · 2022 · Criminal Law

Criminal Lawguilty pleaspreservationmode of proceedings errorineffective assistance of counselappeal waiverguilty pleacoercion

Facts

Defendant agreed to plead guilty to attempted assault in the first degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in full satisfaction of two multicount indictments, as part of a global disposition that also encompassed sentencing on a separate indictment. Before pleading guilty, he waived scheduled Huntley and Wade hearings connected to the attempted assault indictment in order to continue plea negotiations. During the waiver colloquy, defense counsel explained why he viewed the hearings as relatively unimportant, and the court подробно advised defendant of the consequences of waiving them. Over the next three months, defendant rejected an initial global offer, obtained new counsel, pursued additional motion practice on the drug indictment, and accepted the offer only after his omnibus motion on that charge was denied.

Issue

Whether defendant's claim that his guilty plea was coerced by the waiver of suppression hearings in exchange for continued plea negotiations presented an unpreserved challenge to plea voluntariness or instead amounted to a mode of proceedings error excusing preservation. The court also considered whether his ineffective assistance claim was preserved.

Rule

A challenge to the voluntariness of a guilty plea survives an appeal waiver, but it is unpreserved absent an appropriate postallocution motion unless the alleged defect falls within the very narrow mode of proceedings exception. A mode of proceedings error is reserved for the most fundamental flaws going to the very heart of the judicial process; most procedural and even constitutional errors must still be preserved.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Buffalo, Malik Turner pleaded guilty to robbery under an agreement that included a waiver of his right to appeal. Before sentencing, he did not move to withdraw the plea or otherwise challenge it. On appeal, he argues that the plea was involuntary because the prosecutor pressured him during negotiations.

How should the appellate court treat Malik's claim?

Explanation. A challenge to the voluntariness of a guilty plea survives an appeal waiver. But the claim is still unpreserved if the defendant failed to make an appropriate postallocution motion, unless the alleged defect falls within the very narrow mode of proceedings exception. Most constitutional claims still require preservation. (Derived from People v. Stephenson (n.d.).)