Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Jamond REYNOLDS, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered August 24, 2004, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that his plea of guilty and waiver of the right to appeal were not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Everett, 22 A.D.3d 863, 802 N.Y.S.2d 631; People v. Huchital, 22 A.D.3d 681, 801 N.Y.S.2d 909; People v. Jones, 21 A.D.3d 968, 969, 801 N.Y.S.2d 67, lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 754, 810 N.Y.S.2d 423, 843 N.E.2d 1163). In any event, the record establishes that the plea of guilty and waiver of his right to appeal were knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Everett, supra; People v. Jones, supra ). The defendant acknowledged that he discussed the plea and waiver with his attorney, executed the waiver in open court, and indicated his understanding of the nature and consequences of the rights that he waived (see People v. Torres, 24 A.D.3d 692, 808 N.Y.S.2d 380). The defendant's contention that the defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move for a suppression hearing and that this rendered his plea of guilty involuntarily or unknowingly made is without merit.
The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his remaining claims (see People v. Lococo, 92 N.Y.2d 825, 827, 677 N.Y.S.2d 57, 699 N.E.2d 416; People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 675 N.Y.S.2d 327, 698 N.E.2d 46; People v. Everett, supra; People v. Jones, supra ).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 21, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)