People v. Williams

Feb 2, 2007
Versions:37 A.D.3d 1193
829 N.Y.S.2d 802

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]). Contrary to the contention of defendant, his waiver of the right to appeal was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered (see generally People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]). The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his contentions concerning the denial of his request for youthful offender status (see People v Scott, 31 AD3d 1190, 1191 [2006]; People v Dorman, 5 AD3d 1094 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 798 [2004]) and the severity of the sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]). In any event, those contentions are without merit. Although defendant met the eligibility requirements for youthful offender status, Supreme Court carefully considered the request to be considered a youthful offender and stated the reasons for its denial (see generally People v Smith, 286 AD2d 878 [2001], lv denied 98 NY2d 641 [2002]). We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant‘s request for youthful offender status (see People v Ariola, 15 AD3d 882, 883 [2005], lv dismissed 5 NY3d 758 [2005]). We further conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.