The People, etc., respondent, v. Philip G. Sarner, appellant.

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The People, etc., respondent, v. Philip G. Sarner, appellant.

2016–04694 (Ind.No. 38/16)

Decided: February 14, 2018

SHERI S. ROMAN, J.P. JOSEPH J. MALTESE HECTOR D. LASALLE BETSY BARROS, JJ. Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Yael V. Levy and Brian Witthuhn of counsel), for respondent.

Submitted—November 6, 2017


Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christopher G. Quinn, J.), rendered February 4, 2016, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record demonstrates that his waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary (see People v. Bryant, 28 NY3d 1094;  People v. Sanders, 25 NY3d 337;  People v. Lopez, 6 NY3d 248).  The defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes review of his claim that the Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying his request at sentencing to direct his enrollment in a comprehensive alcohol and substance abuse treatment program (see Penal Law § 60.04[6];  People v. Nasworthy, 67 AD3d 1201, 1202).

The defendant's remaining contention does not require reversal.



Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Copied to clipboard