People v. Jones

Jun 15, 2012
Versions:96 A.D.3d 1637
946 N.Y.S.2d 797

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [1]). We reject defendant‘s contention that he did not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waive his right to appeal. Contrary to defendant‘s contention, County Court “engage[d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice” (People v Wright, 66 AD3d 1334 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 912 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Further, the record as a whole, including the written waiver of the right to appeal, establishes “that the defendant understood that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty” (People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see People v Kulyeshie, 71 AD3d 1478, 1478-1479 [2010], lv denied 14 NY3d 889 [2010]).

Defendant‘s valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his contention that the court abused its discretion in denying his request for youthful offender status (see People v Elshabazz, 81 AD3d 1429, 1429 [2011], lv denied 16 NY3d 858 [2011]; People v Kearns, 50 AD3d 1514, 1515 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 790 [2008]), as well as his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 256). Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Carni, Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.