PEOPLE v. ANDERSON (2024)

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Marsha D. Michael, J.), rendered March 15, 2023, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted strangulation in the second degree, and sentencing him to five years of probation, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal (see People v. Thomas, 34 N.Y.3d 545, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 [2019], cert denied 589 U.S. ––––, 140 S.Ct. 2634, 206 L.Ed.2d 512 [2020]), which forecloses review of his excessive sentence claim (People v. Jackson, 225 A.D.3d 547, 548, 207 N.Y.S.3d 484 [1st Dept. 2024], lv denied 41 N.Y.3d 1002, 213 N.Y.S.3d 243, 236 N.E.3d 1261 [2024]).  In any event, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Defendant's challenge to the condition of his probation requiring that he consent to searches of his person, vehicle, and place of abode by a probation officer for weapons and other contraband survives the appeal waiver (see People v. Arias, 210 A.D.3d 593, 594, 179 N.Y.S.3d 47 [1st Dept. 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 1109, 186 N.Y.S.3d 844, 208 N.E.3d 72 [2023]).  Nevertheless, given that defendant used a weapon during the underlying offense, along with his history of violence and use of weapons, the imposition of the condition was “reasonably necessary to [e]nsure that the defendant will lead a law-abiding life or to assist him to do so” (Penal Law § 65.10[1];  see People v. Hale, 93 N.Y.2d 454, 461, 692 N.Y.S.2d 649, 714 N.E.2d 861 [1999]).  “That the court did not orally pronounce the consent-search condition at plea or sentencing did not render it invalid since he was provided a written copy of all conditions of probation” (People v. Scott, 226 A.D.3d 443, 444, 208 N.Y.S.3d 170 [1st Dept. 2024], lv denied 42 N.Y.3d 930, 216 N.Y.S.3d 105, 240 N.E.3d 824 [2024];  see CPL 410.10[1]).

We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.