People v. Sweeney
| Decision Date | 30 December 2010 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Michael J. SWEENEY, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
79 A.D.3d 1789
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Michael J. SWEENEY, Defendant-Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Dec. 30, 2010.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Robert L. Kemp of Counsel), for Defendant-Appellant.
Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Douglas A. Goerss of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: MARTOCHE, J.P., CENTRA, FAHEY, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25[2] ), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is invalid. We reject that contention inasmuch as "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. James, 71 A.D.3d 1465, 1465, 898 N.Y.S.2d 391 [internal quotation marks omitted] ). The further contention of defendant that the court erred in ordering him to pay restitution is encompassed by his valid waiver of the right to appeal inasmuch as the court informed defendant that it may impose restitution ( cf. People v. Kistner, 34 A.D.3d 1316, 823 N.Y.S.2d 795). In any event, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review because, although he objected to the amount of restitution at sentencing, he did not object to the imposition of restitution at the plea proceeding, at sentencing or before signing the confession of judgment ( see generally People v. Hunter, 72 A.D.3d 1536, 898 N.Y.S.2d 905; People v. Therrien, 12 A.D.3d 1045, 784 N.Y.S.2d 771). Defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence is also encompassed by the valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 737, 675 N.Y.S.2d 327, 698 N.E.2d 46).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Northrup
...People v. McCarthy, 83 A.D.3d 1533, 1534, 921 N.Y.S.2d 755,lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 819, 929 N.Y.S.2d 808, 954 N.E.2d 99;People v. Sweeney, 79 A.D.3d 1789, 1789, 915 N.Y.S.2d 775,lv. denied16 N.Y.3d 900, 926 N.Y.S.2d 35, 949 N.E.2d 983;see also People v. Horne, 97 N.Y.2d 404, 414 n. 3, 740 N.Y.S......
-
People v. Lewis
...of justice, particularly because the court stated at the plea hearing that restitution was not being sought ( cf. People v. Sweeney, 79 A.D.3d 1789, 915 N.Y.S.2d 775, lv. denied 16 N.Y.3d 900, 926 N.Y.S.2d 35, 949 N.E.2d 983), and the record is devoid of any evidence supporting the amount o......
- In re Mancuso
- People v. Wright