PEOPLE v. JONES WATKINS (2026)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of aggravated criminal contempt (Penal Law § 215.52 [3]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is invalid because he provided monosyllabic answers to Supreme Court's questions during the waiver colloquy, and that his guilty plea was involuntarily entered because he gave monosyllabic responses to many questions during the plea colloquy. We affirm.

Initially, we conclude that defendant validly waived his right to appeal. The court's explanation of the appeal waiver tracked the appropriate model colloquy (see NY Model Colloquies, Waiver of Right to Appeal; see generally People v. Thomas, 34 N.Y.3d 545, 567, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 [2019], cert denied ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S.Ct. 2634, 206 L.Ed.2d 512 [2020]) and, contrary to defendant's contention, the waiver was not rendered invalid by defendant's monosyllabic responses during the waiver colloquy (see People v. Hoose, 236 A.D.3d 1294, 1295, 229 N.Y.S.3d 741 [4th Dept. 2025], lv denied 44 N.Y.3d 993, 242 N.Y.S.3d 227, 269 N.E.3d 213 [2025]; People v. Burch, 234 A.D.3d 1246, 1246-1247, 226 N.Y.S.3d 433 [4th Dept. 2025], lv denied 43 N.Y.3d 1006, 234 N.Y.S.3d 794, 261 N.E.3d 929 [2025]).

Defendant's contention that his monosyllabic responses to the court's inquiries during the plea colloquy rendered his plea involuntary “is actually a challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution, which is encompassed by the valid waiver of the right to appeal” (People v. Tapia, 158 A.D.3d 1079, 1079, 70 N.Y.S.3d 309 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1088, 79 N.Y.S.3d 110, 103 N.E.3d 1257 [2018] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Kosmetatos, 178 A.D.3d 1433, 1433-1434, 115 N.Y.S.3d 789 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 994, 125 N.Y.S.3d 639, 149 N.E.3d 400 [2020]; People v. Rodriguez, 173 A.D.3d 1840, 1841, 104 N.Y.S.3d 469 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 953, 110 N.Y.S.3d 627, 134 N.E.3d 626 [2019]). In any event, it is well settled that a defendant's monosyllabic responses to the court's questions during a plea colloquy do not render the resulting plea invalid (see People v. Stehm, 227 A.D.3d 1463, 1464, 210 N.Y.S.3d 569 [4th Dept. 2024]; People v. Pryce, 148 A.D.3d 1629, 1630, 51 N.Y.S.3d 296 [4th Dept. 2017], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 1085, 64 N.Y.S.3d 175, 86 N.E.3d 262 [2017]).