People v. Welden

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: June 16, 2016 107077 ________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER MARK J. WELDEN, Appellant. ________________________________ Calendar Date: April 21, 2016 Before: McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Lynch, Devine and Mulvey, JJ. __________ Robert Gregor, Lake George, for appellant. Karen Heggen, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Kristin T. Foust of counsel), for respondent. __________ McCarthy, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (Scarano, J.), rendered September 4, 2014, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of aggravated harassment in the second degree (two counts) and endangering the welfare of a child (two counts). Defendant was charged by a 12-count indictment with a variety of crimes based on allegations regarding his relationship with his son's 14-year-old girlfriend. After his conviction on two counts of aggravated harassment in the second degree and two counts of endangering the welfare of a child, County Court sentenced defendant to an aggregate prison term of two years. Defendant appeals. -2- 107077 By failing to challenge the indictment within five days of being arraigned on it, defendant waived his right to argue that it should have been dismissed based on a deprivation of his right to testify before the grand jury as to his version of events (see CPL 190.50 [5] [c]; People v Littebrant, 55 AD3d 1151, 1153 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 818 [2009]). In any event, defendant's argument is without merit. A review of the record established that defendant was only restricted from continuing narratives unrelated to the charges at issue, such as a story about chasing deer in a field. Accordingly, were this issue before us, we would find that defendant's right to make a statement about the relevant matters before the grand jury was not abridged (see People v Smith, 84 NY2d 998, 1001 [1994]; People v Dunn, 248 AD2d 87, 94-96 [1998]). Finally, given defendant's extensive criminal history, County Court's imposition of the maximum sentence is neither harsh nor excessive (see People v Hill, 130 AD3d 1305, 1306 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 999 [2016]). Defendant's remaining contentions are also without merit. Egan Jr., Lynch, Devine and Mulvey, JJ., concur. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. ENTER: Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court