*1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 603
KA 14-01249
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND SCUDDER, JJ. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PATIQUE DONERLSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (KIMBERLY F. DUGUAY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN X. O’BRIEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (James J.
Piampiano, J.), rendered May 22, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (two counts).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25 [1])). Contrary to the contention of defendant, the record establishes that she knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal ( see generally People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248, 256), and that valid waiver constitutes a general unrestricted waiver that forecloses any challenge by her to the severity of the sentence ( see id. at 255-266; People v Hidalgo , 91 NY2d 733, 737; cf. People v Maracle , 19 NY3d 925, 928). To the extent that defendant contends that the “written waiver of [the right to] appeal is unenforceable because it contained certain nonwaivable rights[, a]ny nonwaivable [rights] purportedly encompassed by the waiver are excluded from the scope of the waiver [and] the remainder of the waiver is valid and enforceable” ( People v Williams , 132 AD3d 1291, 1291, lv denied 26 NY3d 1151 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Gibson , 147 AD3d 1507, 1508; People v Mead , 133 AD3d 1257, 1258).
Entered: April 28, 2017 Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court