PEOPLE v. AZPEITIA (2025)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christopher Hoefenkrieg, J.), rendered August 17, 2023, convicting him of forcible touching (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, his waiver of the right to appeal was valid (see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 254, 257, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145;  People v. Stevens, 203 A.D.3d 958, 163 N.Y.S.3d 615).  The defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes appellate review of his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v. Prenaj, 239 A.D.3d 1001, 235 N.Y.S.3d 181).

The question of whether the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent survived his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Ricottilli, 235 A.D.3d 1013, 227 N.Y.S.3d 718).  “Whether a plea is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent depends on the totality of the circumstances,” involving an assessment of factors that go beyond any inaccurate statement of a defendant's sentencing exposure to include “ ‘the nature and terms of the agreement, the reasonableness of the bargain, and the age and experience of the accused’ ” (People v. Scott, ––– N.Y.3d ––––, ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, ––– N.E.3d ––––, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 01562, *5, quoting People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 736, 675 N.Y.S.2d 327, 698 N.E.2d 46).  Under the totality of the circumstances presented here, the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Drake, 199 A.D.3d 827, 154 N.Y.S.3d 272;  People v. Principato, 194 A.D.3d 851, 147 N.Y.S.3d 135).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

BARROS, J.P., CHAMBERS, CHRISTOPHER and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.