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 of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James T. ROCHE, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (Scarano, J.), rendered December 14, 2009, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
In satisfaction of a six-count indictment stemming from two cocaine sales, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would be sentenced, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of two years to be followed by a period of postrelease supervision between 11/212 and 3 years. He declined to withdraw his plea after learning that he did not qualify as a predicate felon, but that his sentence would not be reduced. He argued, however, that alternatives to a prison sentence or, at the very least, a shorter sentence should be considered. County Court imposed a prison sentence of two years to be followed by postrelease supervision of two years, and defendant now appeals.
We affirm. Defendant's mistaken belief that he would be sentenced as a second felony offender when he entered his guilty plea did not render his appeal waiver invalid and, to the extent that he also challenges the knowing and voluntary nature of his guilty plea, the record does not reflect that he preserved that claim for our review by moving to withdraw the plea or vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v. Ortiz, 69 AD3d 966, 967–968 [2010]; People v. Dean, 52 AD3d 1308, 1308–1309 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 736 [2008] ). Defendant's valid appeal waiver bars his further claims that the sentence was harsh and excessive (see People v. Griffin, 100 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1011 [2013] ) and that County Court abused its discretion in refusing to have him evaluated for inclusion in the judicial diversion program (see CPL art 216; People v. Buswell, 88 AD3d 1164, 1165 [2011]; People v. Ivey, 79 AD3d 1531, 1532 [2010], lvs denied 16 NY3d 856, 859 [2011] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
STEIN, J.P.
SPAIN, GARRY and EGAN JR., JJ., concur.
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: May 23, 2013
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)