People v. NesbittPeople v. Nesbitt
Defendant‘s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his claims that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel and that County Court‘s failure to impose a concurrent sentence was unduly severe inasmuch as these claims do not implicate the voluntariness of his plea (see People v King, 20 AD3d 580, 581 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 829 [2005]; People v Daniels, 16 AD3d 780, 780 [2005]). Moreover, defendant‘s claims in this regard are without merit. Defendant complains only that counsel did not convince County Court to impose his sentence concurrent to his previously imposed sentence. This alleged error alone does not render the representation meaningless when viewed in its entirety (see People v Howard, 1 AD3d 718, 719 [2003]; People v Charles, 258 AD2d 740, 740 [1999], lv denied 93 NY2d 968 [1999]). Given his extensive criminal history, we cannot say that the sentence imposed was either harsh or excessive (see People v Nesbitt, 23 AD3d 837 [2005] [decided herewith]).
Cardona, P.J., Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.