Summary
This Appellate Division, Third Department decision addresses the validity of a defendant's waiver of the right to appeal as part of a guilty plea agreement for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. The court found the waiver knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because the defendant was advised of its terms, discussed it with counsel, and confirmed his understanding during allocution. Consequently, the court affirmed the County Court's judgment and eight-year prison sentence, holding that the valid waiver precluded further appellate challenge to the conviction or sentence.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary
- Whether the defendant's challenge to the severity of his sentence is precluded by a valid waiver of the right to appeal
Holdings
- The waiver was valid because the defendant was advised of its terms, reviewed it with counsel, and affirmed his understanding, making the waiver knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
- The challenge to the sentence is precluded because the waiver of the right to appeal is valid.
Key quotations
“Under these circumstances, we are satisfied that the counseled defendant understood the distinction that some appellate review survived and find that defendant's combined oral and written waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary.”
Factual background
Defendant Angel Sanchez pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, entered a written waiver of the right to appeal as a condition of his plea, and was sentenced to eight years in prison followed by five years of post‑release supervision. He later appealed claiming the waiver was not knowing, intelligent, or voluntary and contesting the severity of the sentence.
Procedural history
The County Court sentenced the appellant to eight years imprisonment and five years post‑release supervision after a guilty plea that included a written waiver of the right to appeal. The appellant appealed asserting the waiver was invalid and challenging the sentence.