People v. Williams

• Decision Date: 30 July 2020
• Docket Number: 110073
• Citation: 126 N.Y.S.3d 440 (Mem),185 A.D.3d 1352
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Christopher WILLIAMS, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

185 A.D.3d 1352

126 N.Y.S.3d 440 (Mem)

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,

v.Christopher WILLIAMS, Appellant.

110073

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

Calendar Date: June 26, 2020

Decided and Entered: July 30, 2020

Aaron A. Louridas, Delmar, for appellant.

David J. Clegg, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Egan Jr., J.P., Mulvey, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered December 14, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the second degree.

Defendant was charged by indictment with burglary in the second degree after he stole property from a private residence to support his drug habit. He pleaded guilty to this crime and was required to waive his right to appeal. Thereafter, he was sentenced, in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, to eight years in prison followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Contrary to his claim, defendant validly waived his right to appeal. The record discloses that County Court advised defendant of the trial-related rights that he was forfeiting by pleading guilty and clearly indicated that the right to appeal was separate and distinct from those rights, noting that waiving this right was part of the plea agreement (see People v. Schroeder, 181 A.D.3d 1095, 1095, 118 N.Y.S.3d 452 [2020] ; 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] ). Defendant communicated his understanding and then executed a written appeal waiver in open court after reviewing it with counsel and stated that he did not have any questions (see People v. Gumbs, 182 A.D.3d 701, 702, 122 N.Y.S.3d 746 [2020] ; People v. Barragan, 178 A.D.3d 1150, 1151, 115 N.Y.S.3d 497 [2019] ). The written appeal waiver reiterated that it was separate and distinct from the other trial-related rights that defendant was giving up by pleading guilty and encompassed any challenge to the fairness of the sentence (see People v. Loffler, 178 A.D.3d 1152, 1153, 111 N.Y.S.3d 569 [2019] ; People v. Barragan, 178 A.D.3d at 1151, 115 N.Y.S.3d 497 ). Under these circumstances, and as we discern no other infirmities in the waiver (compare People v. Thomas, 34 N.Y.3d 545, 564, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 [2019] ; People v. Barrales, 179 A.D.3d 1313, 1315, 118 N.Y.S.3d 263 [2020] ), we find that it was valid and forecloses defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence (see People v. Couse, 178 A.D.3d 1207,...