Appeal from two judgments of the Justice Court of the Town of Poughkeepsie, Dutchess County (Paul O. Sullivan, J.), rendered September 6, 2011. Each judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of aggravated harassment in the second degree.

ORDERED that the judgments of conviction are reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and the accusatory instruments are dismissed.

By separate accusatory instruments, defendant was charged with aggravated harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.30 [1]). Defendant pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced to concurrent seven-month terms of imprisonment. On appeal, defendant contends, among other things, that his pleas were insufficient in that they failed to meet the minimum constitutional standards set forth in Boykin v Alabama (395 US 238 [1969]).

Challenges to the sufficiency of a guilty plea must generally be preserved by a motion to withdraw the plea under CPL 220.60 (3) or by a motion to vacate the judgment of conviction under CPL 440.10 (see People v Louree, 8 NY3d 541, 546 [2007] People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665-666 [1988]). Although defendant failed to make either such motion, "the complete absence of any indication that defendant waived his Boykin rights could . . . be viewed as a mode of proceedings error for which preservation is not required" (People v Tyrell, NY3d , 2013 NY Slip Op 08288, *4 [2013]).

The record fails to affirmatively demonstrate defendant's understanding, or waiver, of his constitutional rights inasmuch as, during his plea allocutions, there was no discussion of any of the pertinent constitutional rights, none of the rights were addressed by the Justice Court, defense counsel or defendant, and there is no indication that defendant spoke with his attorney regarding the constitutional consequences of taking the pleas (see People v Tyrell, NY3d , 2013 NY Slip Op 08288). Consequently, the judgments of conviction cannot be sustained (see United States v Dominguez Benitez, 542 US 74, 84 n 10 [2004] Boykin v Alabama, 395 US at 244; People v Tyrell, NY3d , 2013 NY Slip Op 08288). Moreover, the accusatory instruments are dismissed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, since defendant has completed his sentences, and no penological purpose would be served by reinstating the proceedings (see People v Facey, 30 Misc 3d 138[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 50224[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]).

Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are reversed and the accusatory instruments are dismissed.

Nicolai, P.J., Iannacci and Tolbert, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 10, 2014