THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. DANDRE MARTIN DEFENDANT APPELLANT

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. DANDRE R. MARTIN, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

KA 13–00120

Decided: February 05, 2016

PRESENT:  CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, AND SCUDDER, JJ. THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (BARBARA J. DAVIES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MATTHEW B. POWERS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:  Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of two counts of attempted robbery in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.10[2][b] ).  Contrary to defendant's contention, he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived both his right to appeal the conviction, as well as his separate and distinct right to appeal the harshness of the sentence (see People v. Rodman, 104 AD3d 1186, 1188, lv denied 22 NY3d 1202;  cf.  People v. Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928).

Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at sentencing.  To the extent that defendant's contention survives his plea of guilty and valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Bonavito, 121 AD3d 1499, 1500, lv denied 25 NY3d 988), we conclude that it is without merit (see generally People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404).  The record establishes that defendant received “an advantageous plea and nothing in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel” (Ford, 86 N.Y.2d at 404).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court