<div>People v O'Neal - 2026 NY Slip Op 02526

<div> skip to main content </div>

<div> <p>It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.</p> </div>

<div> <header> <div> <img src="/reporter/images/nys-logo-white.svg" alt=""> </div> <div> <span title="Law Reporting Bureau Home Page">Law Reporting <br>Bureau <span></span></span> <span>Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter</span> <nav> Court Decisions Resources About </nav> </div> <div> <img src="/reporter/images/lrb-seal.png" alt=""> </div> </header> </div>

<nav> <ol> <li>Home</li> <li>All Court Decisions</li> <li>Decisions</li> </ol> </nav> <div> <div> <h1>People v O'Neal</h1> <p>2026 NY Slip Op 02526</p> <p>April 24, 2026</p> <p>Appellate Division, Fourth Department</p> <p>Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.</p> <p>This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.</p> </div> <div> <p>THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,</p> <p>v</p> <p>CHRISTOPHER O'NEAL, JR., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.</p> </div> <p>Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department</p> <p>Decided on April 24, 2026</p> <p>158 KA 24-01473</p> <p>Present: Bannister, J.P., Montour, Greenwood, Nowak, And Hannah, JJ.</p> <div> <p>RYAN JAMES MULDOON, AUBURN, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. </p> <p>SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (MERIDETH H. SMITH OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. </p> </div> <p> </p><p> Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Thomas E. Moran, J.), rendered April 29, 2024. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. </p> <p></p>[*1] <p>It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.</p> <p>Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]). Contrary to defendant's contention, he validly waived his right to appeal (<i>see People v Moody</i>, 240 AD3d 1323, 1324 [4th Dept 2025], <i>lv denied</i> 44 NY3d 1012 [2025]; <i>People v Williams</i>, 237 AD3d 1581, 1582 [4th Dept 2025], <i>lv denied</i> 44 NY3d 985 [2025]; <i>see generally People v Thomas</i>, 34 NY3d 545, 564-566 [2019], <i>cert denied</i> 589 US 1302 [2020]). While defendant is correct that Supreme Court failed to ascertain defendant's understanding of the contents of the written waiver of the right to appeal on the record, that "deficiency . . . is of no moment where, as here, the oral waiver was adequate" (<i>People v Brinson</i>, 240 AD3d 1376, 1377 [4th Dept 2025], <i>lv denied</i> 44 NY3d 1064 [2025]). Defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (<i>see People v Lopez</i>, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; <i>People v Hidalgo</i>, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).</p> <p>Defendant further contends that the court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel without holding a hearing. We reject that contention. As an initial matter, we note that defendant's contention survives his valid waiver of the right to appeal " 'only insofar as he contends that his plea was infected by the allegedly ineffective assistance and that he entered the plea because of his attorney's allegedly poor performance' " (<i>People v Strickland</i>, 103 AD3d 1178, 1178 [4th Dept 2013]; <i>see People v Wong</i>, 151 AD3d 1853, 1854 [4th Dept 2017], <i>lv denied</i> 30 NY3d 954 [2017]). "When a defendant moves to withdraw a guilty plea, the nature and extent of the fact-finding inquiry rest[ ] largely in the discretion of the Judge to whom the motion is made and a hearing will be granted only in rare instances" (<i>People v Brown</i>, 14 NY3d 113, 116 [2010] [internal quotation marks omitted]; <i>see People v Ciskiewic</i>, 219 AD3d 1696, 1696 [4th Dept 2023], <i>lv denied</i> 40 NY3d 1091 [2024]). Here, "nothing in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel" (<i>People v Raghnal</i>, 185 AD3d 1411, 1413 [4th Dept 2020], <i>lv denied</i> 35 NY3d 1115 [2020] [internal quotation marks omitted]), "[d]efendant admitted each element of the offense[ ] during his plea allocution and did not claim either that he was innocent or that he had been coerced[,] . . . [and defendant's claims] presented credibility issues that the court could properly resolve without a hearing" (<i>People v Newsome</i>, 140 AD3d 1695, 1696 [4th Dept 2016] [internal quotation marks omitted]).</p> <p>Entered: April 24, 2026</p> <p>Ann Dillon Flynn</p> <p>Clerk of the Court</p> </div>

<div> <footer> <div> <p>Court Decisions</p> All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search </div> <div> <p>Resources</p> RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting &amp; Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index </div> <div> <p>About</p> About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter </div> <div> <p>Quick Contact Info</p> <p>17 Lodge Street</p> <p>Albany, NY 12207</p> <p>Phone: (518) 453-6900</p> </div> </footer> </div> <div> <p>Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.</p> </div>

</div>