PEOPLE v. GONZALEZ (2026)

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Marsha D. Michael, J.), rendered November 13, 2023, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a prison term of 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant validly waived 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]).  The court's oral colloquy with defendant, when viewed as a whole, and in connection with a detailed written waiver, separated the right to appeal from the rights automatically forfeited by a guilty plea, and otherwise satisfied the requirements of a valid waiver.  The court was not required to enumerate every waived claim (see People v. Evans, 59 A.D.3d 216, 216, 873 N.Y.S.2d 60 [1st Dept. 2009], lv denied 12 N.Y.3d 816, 881 N.Y.S.2d 23, 908 N.E.2d 931 [2009]).  In any case, the written waiver, which the court referenced during the colloquy, identified the specific appealable issues that survive a waiver.  Defense counsel also confirmed she explained the appeal waiver to defendant, and defendant acknowledged that he understood.  Finally, “[n]othing in the colloquy or written waiver suggested that defendant would forfeit his right to appellate counsel for claims that survived the waiver” (People v. Diallo, 242 A.D.3d 612, 612, 241 N.Y.S.3d 656 [1st Dept. 2025] [internal quotation marks omitted];  see also People v. Yizar, 240 A.D.3d 416, 416, 235 N.Y.S.3d 47 [1st Dept. 2025], lv denied 44 N.Y.3d 985, 241 N.Y.S.3d 147, 267 N.E.3d 1215 [2025]).

Defendant's appeal waiver included a valid waiver of his right to raise a claim for a statutory speedy trial violation, which forecloses review of defendant's claim under CPL 30.30 (see People v. Person, 184 A.D.3d 447, 448, 126 N.Y.S.3d 14 [1st Dept. 2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 1069, 129 N.Y.S.3d 387, 152 N.E.3d 1189 [2020];  People v. Merchant, 209 A.D.3d 453, 453, 174 N.Y.S.3d 845 [1st Dept. 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 987, 181 N.Y.S.3d 199, 201 N.E.3d 816 [2022]).  As an alternative holding, defendant's speedy trial claim fails on the merits, as the People exercised good faith efforts and due diligence to comply with the requirements of CPL 245.20(l), and as such their certificate of compliance, filed on October 26, 2020 was valid (People v. Bay, 41 N.Y.3d 200, 209–211, 208 N.Y.S.3d 490, 232 N.E.3d 168 [2023];  see CPL 245.50[5],[6], 30.30[5][a]).  Accordingly, the motion court properly rejected defendant's arguments that the People's statement of readiness was illusory and did not toll the speedy trial clock, that the People should have been charged with the entire 308–day period from January 13, 2021 through November 17, 2021 (the date of defendant's COC motion), and that his indictment should have been dismissed pursuant to CPL 30.30(5).

Defendant's valid waiver of appeal also forecloses review of his excessive sentence claim (People v. Nunez, 220 A.D.3d 597, 597, 197 N.Y.S.3d 61 [1st Dept. 2023], lv denied 41 N.Y.3d 1004, 213 N.Y.S.3d 222, 236 N.E.3d 1240 [2024]). In any event, we perceive no basis for reducing defendant's sentence.