PEOPLE v. JONES (2009)

 On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15[2] ), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered.   We reject that contention.   “Defendant's responses to County Court's questions unequivocally established that defendant understood the proceedings and was voluntarily waiving the right to appeal” (People v. Gilbert, 17 A.D.3d 1164, 1164, 793 N.Y.S.2d 847, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 762, 801 N.Y.S.2d 257, 834 N.E.2d 1267;  see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145).   The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the court's denial of his request for youthful offender status (see People v. Porter, 55 A.D.3d 1313, 865 N.Y.S.2d 800, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 899, 873 N.Y.S.2d 275, 901 N.E.2d 769;  People v. Kearns, 50 A.D.3d 1514, 856 N.Y.S.2d 772, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 790, 866 N.Y.S.2d 616, 896 N.E.2d 102;   People v. Williams, 38 A.D.3d 1232, 834 N.Y.S.2d 907, lv. denied 8 N.Y.3d 992, 838 N.Y.S.2d 495, 869 N.E.2d 671, 9 N.Y.3d 927, 844 N.Y.S.2d 182, 875 N.E.2d 901), as well as his challenge to the severity of the bargained-for sentence (see Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d at 255-256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145;  People v. Washington, 53 A.D.3d 1120, 859 N.Y.S.2d 883, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 796, 866 N.Y.S.2d 622, 896 N.E.2d 108;  People v. Williams, 49 A.D.3d 1280, 852 N.Y.S.2d 887).

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

MEMORANDUM: