PEOPLE v. SANCHEZ (2025)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Rensselaer County (Jennifer Sober, J.), rendered March 27, 2023, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

In satisfaction of a four-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and the plea agreement required defendant to waive the right to appeal.  County Court thereafter sentenced defendant, as a second violent felony offender, to eight years in prison, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision.  Defendant appeals.

We affirm.  Contrary to defendant's assertion, we find that his waiver of the right to appeal is valid.  Defendant was advised that an appeal waiver was a condition of his plea agreement.  County Court confirmed that defendant had discussed the appeal waiver with counsel, and the court explained that the waiver of appeal is separate and distinct from the trial-related rights forfeited by a guilty plea and expressly delineated certain of the appellate rights that survive the waiver, and defendant affirmed his understanding thereof (see People v. Patterson, 233 A.D.3d 1204, 1205, 221 N.Y.S.3d 794 [3d Dept. 2024];  People v. Cali, 229 A.D.3d 940, 941, 215 N.Y.S.3d 222 [3d Dept. 2024]).  During the plea allocution, defendant executed a written waiver of appeal, after reviewing it with counsel, which also delineated certain appellate rights that survive the waiver.  Defendant confirmed that he understood its terms (see People v. Moses, 236 A.D.3d 1201, 1201–1202, 229 N.Y.S.3d 694 [3d Dept. 2025];  People v. Lane, 233 A.D.3d 1207, 1208, 223 N.Y.S.3d 428 [3d Dept. 2024], lv denied 43 N.Y.3d 945, 231 N.Y.S.3d 402, 257 N.E.3d 97 [2025]).  “Under these circumstances, we are satisfied that the counseled defendant understood the distinction that some appellate review survived and find that defendant's combined oral and written waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary” (People v. Joseph, 227 A.D.3d 1233, 1235, 211 N.Y.S.3d 592 [3d Dept. 2024] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], lv denied 42 N.Y.3d 1053, 225 N.Y.S.3d 660, 250 N.E.3d 671 [2024];  accord People v. Lane, 233 A.D.3d at 1208–1209, 223 N.Y.S.3d 428).  Given the valid appeal waiver, defendant's challenge to the severity of his sentence is precluded (see People v. Leroux, 234 A.D.3d 1214, 1214, 225 N.Y.S.3d 782 [3d Dept. 2025];  People v. Ford, 234 A.D.3d 1054, 1055, 224 N.Y.S.3d 716 [3d Dept. 2025], lv denied 43 N.Y.3d 963, 232 N.Y.S.3d 453, 258 N.E.3d 1226 [2025]).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Garry, P.J., Aarons, Pritzker, Fisher and Mackey, JJ., concur.