Calendar Date: May 4, 2018Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Lynch, Mulvey and Rumsey, JJ.__________Christopher Hammond, Cooperstown, for appellant.Stephen K. Cornwell Jr., District Attorney, Binghamton(Stephen D. Ferri of counsel), for respondent.__________Mulvey, J.Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County(Cawley Jr., J.), rendered February 29, 2016, convictingdefendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of coercion in thefirst degree.Defendant was charged in an indictment with rape in thefirst degree and rape in the second degree following an incidentin which he induced a 14-year-old girl to engage in sexualintercourse with him. In exchange for the dismissal of theindictment, he pleaded guilty to coercion in the first degree ascharged in a superior court information. He was sentenced, as asecond felony offender, to a prison term of 3ó to 7 years inaccordance with the plea agreement. He now appeals.Defendant argues that his guilty plea must be vacatedbecause County Court failed to adequately inform him of theconstitutional rights he was waiving by pleading guilty.Although defendant did not preserve this claim through anappropriate postallocution motion (see People v Conceicao, 26NY3d 375, 382 [2015]; People v Herbert, 147 AD3d 1208, 1210[2017]), we find that the error warrants reversal of the judgmentof conviction in the interest of justice (see People v Schmitz,159 AD3d 1222, 1223 [2018]; People v Cotto, 156 AD3d 1063, 1064[2017]). “When a defendant opts to plead guilty, he [or she]must waive certain constitutional rights — the privilege againstself-incrimination and the rights to a jury trial and to beconfronted by witnesses” (People v Tyrell, 22 NY3d 359, 365[2013]; see Boykin v Alabama, 395 US 238, 243 [1969]). “Whilethere is no mandatory catechism required of a pleading defendant,there must be an affirmative showing on the record that thedefendant waived his or her constitutional rights” (People vLowe, 133 AD3d 1099, 1100 [2015] [internal quotation marks,brackets and citations omitted]; see People v Tyrell, 22 NY3d at365; People v Cotto, 156 AD3d at 1064).During the plea proceedings, County Court engaged in anabbreviated colloquy during which it made only a passingreference to the rights that defendant was giving up by pleadingguilty. Notably, the court did not mention the privilege againstself-incrimination or advise defendant of his right to a jurytrial. Nor did the court ascertain whether defendant hadconferred with counsel regarding the trial-related rights that hewas waiving or the constitutional consequences of his guiltyplea. With no affirmative showing on the record that defendantunderstood and voluntarily waived his constitutional rights whenhe entered his guilty plea, the plea was invalid and must bevacated (see People v Cotto, 156 AD3d at 1064; People v Lowe, 133AD3d at 1100-1101; People v Klinger, 129 AD3d 1115, 1116-1117[2015]; compare People v Bond, 146 AD3d 1155, 1156 [2017], lvdenied 29 NY3d 1076 [2017]; People v Proper, 133 AD3d at 919-920). In light of our disposition, we need not addressdefendant’s remaining claim.Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Lynch and Rumsey, JJ., concur.ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, as a matter ofdiscretion in the interest of justice, and matter remitted to theCounty Court of Broome County for further proceedings notinconsistent with this Court’s decision.ENTER:Robert D. MaybergerClerk of the Court
