PEOPLE v. LATIMORE (2025)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from three judgments of the County Court, Dutchess County (Edward T. McLoughlin, J.), all rendered March 4, 2022, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 3/21, grand larceny in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 50/21, and grand larceny in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 71/21, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, his waiver of the right to appeal was valid.  Although much of the discussion of the waiver of the right to appeal took place after the defendant had admitted his guilt, the appeal waiver was mentioned as being a condition of the plea bargain prior to the defendant's pleas of guilty and admissions of guilt (see People v. Victor, 235 A.D.3d 783, 226 N.Y.S.3d 592;  People v. White, 234 A.D.3d 884, 225 N.Y.S.3d 378).  Under the totality of the circumstances, including the exemplary explanation of the right to appeal provided to the defendant and the defendant's age, experience, and background, the appeal waiver was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Sanders, 25 N.Y.3d 337, 340, 12 N.Y.S.3d 593, 34 N.E.3d 344;  People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 264, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645;  People v. Victor, 235 A.D.3d 783, 226 N.Y.S.3d 592;  People v. White, 234 A.D.3d 884, 225 N.Y.S.3d 378).

Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal encompasses his claim that the enhanced sentences were excessive (see People v. Delcid, 234 A.D.3d 871, 871, 225 N.Y.S.3d 377;  People v. Florio, 179 A.D.3d 834, 835, 113 N.Y.S.3d 886;  People v. Mickens, 151 A.D.3d 984, 984, 54 N.Y.S.3d 309;  People v. Thompson, 148 A.D.3d 1187, 49 N.Y.S.3d 310).

CONNOLLY, J.P., GENOVESI, DOWLING and LOVE, JJ., concur.