New Paltz man’s conviction on sexual offense charge upheld by appellate court – Daily Freeman | #childpredator | #kidsaftey | #childsaftey

Stock photo of gavel

KINGSTON, N.Y. — A New Paltz man’s appeal of his conviction for sexual conduct with a minor was denied by the State Appellate Court, Third Division, on Thursday after he tried and failed to withdraw his guilty plea in Ulster County Supreme Court.

Prosecutors said Urlich Arlt admitted in 2018 to engaging in two or more acts of sexual conduct with a child under the age of 13 between 2015 and 2017. He entered into a plea agreement in which he was sentenced in 2019 to seven years in prison and 10 years of post-release supervision. An order of protection was also issued on behalf of the victim and two other children.

Judges said claims by the defendant that the sentence was too harsh were not persuasive, given the nature of the crimes and the plea he made. They also said that claims the court was wrong to deny his attempt to change his plea were not persuasive based on his argument that he was misinformed by the court and his legal representation and not able to review discovery materials.

The decision said, “the plea colloquy belied defendant’s contentions. During the plea proceedings, the court thoroughly and repeatedly explained to defendant the terms and nature of the plea agreement, the rights he would forfeit by pleading guilty, the requirement that he register as a sex offender, as well as the potential positive and negative ramifications, including being charged with higher felonies, were he to reject the plea offer – all of which defendant assured the court he understood.

“The record further reflects that defendant acknowledged that he had sufficient time to speak with counsel, was satisfied with counsel’s representation, was not being forced or coerced into pleading guilty and had no questions about the plea, sentence or consequences of pleading guilty.

“Under the circumstances, the general assertions and unsupported claim of innocence forming the basis of defendant’s motion to withdraw did not undermine the voluntariness of the plea.”

Arlt’s sentence and the order of protection against him were upheld.