People v. HackettPeople v. Hackett
The defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737 [2006]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11 [1989]; People v Duah, 91 AD3d 884 [2012]). The defendant‘s valid waiver of his right to appeal forecloses appellate review of his challenge to the hearing court‘s suppression determination (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v Pena, 73 AD3d 1216, 1216-1217 [2010]; People v Johnson, 58 AD3d 868 [2009]).
The defendant‘s contention that the County Court coerced him into pleading guilty is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Strong, 80 AD3d 717, 717-718 [2011]; People v Scivolette, 80 AD3d 630, 630-631 [2011]; People v Dash, 74 AD3d 1859, 1859 [2010]). In any event, the defendant‘s contention is unsupported by the record (see People v Strong, 80 AD3d at 717-718; People v Scivolette, 80 AD3d at 631; People v Bravo, 72 AD3d 697, 698 [2010]; People v Pagan, 297 AD2d 582, 582 [2002]). Dickerson, J.P., Chambers, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.