PEOPLE v. BRIDGES (2025)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Andrew Ceresia, J.), rendered August 30, 2021 in Rensselaer County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

In satisfaction of a seven-count indictment and any uncharged drug sales by defendant occurring in Rensselaer County, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, agreed to waive his right to appeal and executed a voluntary forfeiture agreement consistent with the terms of the plea agreement.  In accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, Supreme Court sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of five years, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision.  In addition, Supreme Court ordered forfeiture of $500 based upon defendant's execution of a voluntary forfeiture agreement and, denying defendant's request for a waiver, imposed mandatory surcharges and fees.  Defendant appeals.

Initially, we are unpersuaded that defendant's waiver of his right to appeal is invalid.  The record reflects that defendant was advised that the waiver of his right to appeal was a condition of the plea and was separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfeited by pleading guilty, which defendant acknowledged he understood.  In addition, defendant executed a written appeal waiver in open court – which written waiver set forth certain rights that survived and indicated that he had discussed the matter with counsel and understood its contents – and assured the court that he was voluntarily waiving his right to appeal.  Based thereon, we are satisfied that the combined oral and written waiver satisfy the requirements of a valid appeal waiver (see People v. Blanchard, 188 A.D.3d 1414, 1415, 136 N.Y.S.3d 492 [3d Dept 2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 1055, 141 N.Y.S.3d 765, 165 N.E.3d 691 [2021];  People v. Gumbs, 182 A.D.3d 701, 701–702, 122 N.Y.S.3d 746 [3d Dept 2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 1066, 129 N.Y.S.3d 398, 152 N.E.3d 1200 [2020];  see also People v. Sanchez, 241 A.D.3d 1675, 1676, 239 N.Y.S.3d 666 [3d Dept 2025], lv denied 44 N.Y.3d 1029, 246 N.Y.S.3d 315, 272 N.E.3d 1152 [Nov. 24, 2025];  People v. Kidd, 210 A.D.3d 1148, 1149, 177 N.Y.S.3d 785 [3d Dept 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 1073, 183 N.Y.S.3d 801, 204 N.E.3d 437 [2023]).

To the extent that defendant challenges the agreed-upon amount of civil forfeiture, such contention “is waived both by his written forfeiture stipulation and his valid appeal waiver” (People v. Delosh, 227 A.D.3d 1276, 1277, 212 N.Y.S.3d 464 [3d Dept 2024];  see People v. Vellon, 128 A.D.3d 1274, 1275, 10 N.Y.S.3d 347 [3d Dept 2015], lv denied 26 N.Y.3d 1043, 22 N.Y.S.3d 173, 43 N.E.3d 383 [2015];  compare People v. Gaddy, 221 A.D.3d 1351, 1352, 200 N.Y.S.3d 789 [3d Dept 2023], lv denied 41 N.Y.3d 983, 210 N.Y.S.3d 755, 234 N.E.3d 371 [2024]).  Defendant's challenge to the denial of his request that the mandatory surcharges be waived is also precluded by the valid appeal waiver (see People v. Perez, 243 A.D.3d 685, 242 N.Y.S.3d 781, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 06188, *1 [2d Dept 2025];  People v. Delosh, 227 A.D.3d at 1277, 212 N.Y.S.3d 464; People v. Cota, 136 A.D.3d 1116, 1117, 24 N.Y.S.3d 537 [3d Dept 2016]).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Powers, J.

Garry, P.J., Aarons, Pritzker and Corcoran, JJ., concur.