| People v Reynolds |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 03306 [117 AD3d 1196] |
| May 8, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vRobert S. Reynolds, Appellant. |
Abbie Goldbas, Utica, for appellant.
William G. Gabor, District Attorney, Wampsville (Robert A. Mascari of counsel), forrespondent.
Lahtinen, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Madison County(DiStefano, J.), rendered July 26, 2012, (1) upon a verdict convicting defendant of thecrimes of rape in the third degree and assault in the second degree, and (2) convictingdefendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of sexual abuse in the first degree (twocounts) and sodomy in the third degree.
Defendant was charged in an 11-count indictment with various sex crimes related toa 2010 rape of a 26-year-old victim and the sexual abuse of three children between theages of 9 and 14 during 2002 and 2003. Defendant was tried on the charges related to the2010 crimes and was convicted by a jury of rape in the third degree and assault in thesecond degree. He ultimately pleaded guilty to sexual abuse in the first degree (twocounts) and sodomy in the third degree in full satisfaction of the charges related to the2002-2003 crimes, with the understanding that the plea agreement would also resolve thesentencing aspect of his convictions on the 2010 crimes. As part of the plea agreement,defendant waived his right to appeal. In accordance with the plea agreement, defendantwas thereafter sentenced, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of fouryears, with 10 years of postrelease supervision, for the rape conviction and seven years,with five years of postrelease supervision, for the assault conviction. For the convictionsrelated to the 2002-2003 crimes, defendant was sentenced to concurrent prison sentencesof 3 to 6 years for the sexual abuse convictions and 2 to 4 years for the sodomyconviction, with these sentences to run consecutively to the sentences for the rape andassault [*2]convictions. Defendant appeals.[FN*]
Upon review of the record, we conclude that, contrary to defendant's claim, hiswaiver of the right to appeal was valid. County Court distinguished the right to appealfrom the rights automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty. Defendant also executed awritten waiver in open court and he acknowledged that he had discussed the waiver withcounsel and that he understood that the waiver pertained to the convictions for both the2002-2003 crimes and the 2010 crimes. County Court further confirmed that defendantunderstood that, by executing the waiver, defendant was knowingly and voluntarilywaiving his right to appeal (seePeople v Torres, 110 AD3d 1119, 1119 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 1044[2013]; People v Marshall,108 AD3d 884, 884 [2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 957 [2013). Defendant's soleremaining claim, which relates to the sufficiency of his plea allocution to the sodomyconviction, is precluded by his valid appeal waiver (see People v Bonville, 104 AD3d 1024, 1024 [2013]; People v Swindell, 72 AD3d1340, 1341 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 778 [2010]).
McCarthy, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.
Footnote *:Defendant was laterresentenced to determinate sentences of three years in prison, to be followed by five yearsof postrelease supervision, for the sexual abuse convictions, with the sentences to runconcurrently with the sentence imposed for the sodomy conviction and consecutively tothe sentences imposed for the convictions for the 2010 crimes. Defendant does notappeal from the resentencing.