People v. Shaver

• Citation: 92 A.D.3d 978,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 00670,938 N.Y.S.2d 358
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert SHAVER, Appellant.
• Decision Date: 02 February 2012
• Court: New York Supreme Court Appellate Division

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 00670
92 A.D.3d 978
938 N.Y.S.2d 358

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Robert SHAVER, Appellant.

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

Feb. 2, 2012.

[938 N.Y.S.2d 358]

Paul J. Connolly, Delmar, for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Kenneth C. Weafer of counsel), for respondent.

Before: PETERS, J.P., LAHTINEN, KAVANAGH, STEIN and GARRY, JJ.

[938 N.Y.S.2d 359]

PETERS, J.P.

[92 A.D.3d 978] Appeals (1) from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.), rendered March 3, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal contempt in the first degree, and (2) from a judgment of said court, rendered March 3, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of perjury in the first degree.

Defendant was charged with various crimes in two separate indictments. He pleaded guilty to criminal contempt in the first degree in satisfaction of the first indictment and perjury in the first degree in satisfaction of the second indictment. The guilty pleas were also in satisfaction of any uncharged crimes and defendant waived his right to appeal as part of both pleas. County Court thereafter sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to the agreed-upon concurrent prison sentences of 2 to 4 [92 A.D.3d 979] years on the criminal contempt conviction and 3 to 6 years on the perjury conviction. The court also issued five orders of protection. Defendant appeals.

We reject defendant's contention that his waivers of the right to appeal were invalid. Our review of the plea colloquys reveals that County Court distinguished the right to appeal from the rights forfeited by defendant's guilty pleas and defendant acknowledged his understanding of the waivers. Further, defendant signed written waivers in open court that acknowledged that counsel had explained the ramifications of the waivers. Accordingly, we find that defendant validly waived his right to appeal ( see People v. Benson, 87 A.D.3d 1228, 1228, 929 N.Y.S.2d 885 [2011]; People v. Wicks, 83 A.D.3d 1223, 1224, 920 N.Y.S.2d 488 [2011], lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 810, 929 N.Y.S.2d 570, 953 N.E.2d 808 [2011] ). Defendant's valid waivers of the right to appeal preclude his contention that the sentence imposed on the perjury conviction was harsh or excessive ( see People v. Richardson, 83 A.D.3d 1290, 1292, 920 N.Y.S.2d 752 [2011], lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 821, 929 N.Y.S.2d 809, 954 N.E.2d 100...