Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the defendant's criminal conviction for possession of a firearm following a guilty plea. The court determined that the defendant's waiver of his right to appeal was valid, knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. Consequently, the court precluded appellate review of his constitutional challenge to the indictment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent
- Whether a valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes appellate review of a constitutional challenge to the indictment
Holdings
- The waiver was valid because the record shows the defendant had a full appreciation of the terms and consequences of the waiver, making it knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
- A valid waiver of the right to appeal bars appellate review of the defendant's constitutional challenge to the indictment.
Key quotations
“Under the totality of the circumstances, including the exemplary explanation of the right to appeal provided to the defendant, the record reflects that the defendant had a full appreciation of the terms and consequences of his appeal waiver and that the waiver was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.” (at 1)
Factual background
Shemuel Felipe pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a firearm in Kings County. As part of the plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal, a waiver that was explained to him by the trial court. He later appealed, asserting that the waiver was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent and challenging the indictment’s constitutionality.
Procedural history
The defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a firearm in the Supreme Court, Kings County. The trial court entered a judgment on May 16, 2023, which included a waiver of the right to appeal as part of the plea bargain. The defendant appealed, challenging the validity of the waiver and the constitutionality of the indictment.