People v. Diggs, 109410

• Decision Date: 12 December 2019
• Docket Number: 109410
• Citation: 116 N.Y.S.3d 707,178 A.D.3d 1203
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carlos DIGGS, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

178 A.D.3d 1203
116 N.Y.S.3d 707

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Carlos DIGGS, Appellant.

109410

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: November 13, 2019
Decided and Entered: December 12, 2019

116 N.Y.S.3d 708

Erin C. Morigerato, Albany, for appellant.

D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mulvey, J.P., Devine, Aarons and Pritzker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Mulvey, J.P.

116 N.Y.S.3d 709

178 A.D.3d 1203

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered March 31, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of aggravated criminal contempt, criminal contempt in the first degree and aggravated family offense.

Defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated criminal contempt, criminal contempt in the first degree and aggravated family offense in full satisfaction of three indictments and approximately 50 uncharged crimes, and waived his right to appeal. County Court denied defendant's multiple requests for new counsel, as well as defendant's pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea on the grounds that, among other things, he was innocent and did not receive meaningful assistance from defense counsel as

178 A.D.3d 1204

a result of a personal conflict between him and defense counsel.¹ Thereafter, consistent with the plea agreement, County Court sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to consecutive prison terms of 3½ to 7 years on the aggravated contempt conviction, 2 to 4 years on the criminal contempt in the first degree conviction and 1½ to 3 years on the aggravated family offense conviction. In addition, on three separate occasions during the sentencing proceeding, the court found defendant guilty of criminal contempt of court and imposed fines totaling $3,000. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Initially, we find without merit defendant's contention that the waiver of the right to appeal is invalid. The record reflects that, after sufficiently setting forth the rights automatically forfeited by the guilty plea, County Court explained that the appeal waiver was separate and distinct from those trial-related rights, and defendant affirmed his understanding thereof (see People v. Thacker , 173 A.D.3d 1360, 1360–1361, 102 N.Y.S.3d 764 [2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 938, 109 N.Y.S.3d 730, 133 N.E.3d 434 [2019] ; People v. Tucker , 164 A.D.3d 948, 949, 81 N.Y.S.3d 677 [2018] ). Additionally, during the plea proceeding, defendant conferred with counsel and then executed a detailed appeal waiver in open court, acknowledging that he had no questions about the document and understood its contents (see People v. Jawan , 165 A.D.3d 1350, 1350, 82 N.Y.S.3d 905 [2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1173, 97 N.Y.S.3d 580, 121 N.E.3d 207 [2019] ). Contrary to defendant's contention, we find that the record demonstrates that defendant understood and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see People v. Thacker , 173 A.D.3d at 1361, 102 N.Y.S.3d 764 ; People v. White , 172 A.D.3d 1822, 1823, 101 N.Y.S.3d 519 [2019], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 1110, 106 N.Y.S.3d 661, 130 N.E.3d 1271 [2019] ; People v. Tucker , 164 A.D.3d at 949, 81 N.Y.S.3d 677 ).

We are unpersuaded by defendant's challenge to the...