People v Purnell

2020 NY Slip Op 05094 [186 AD3d 1834]

September 24, 2020

Appellate Division, Third Department

As corrected through Wednesday, November 4, 2020

[*1]

The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Jason Purnell, Appellant.

Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Kristin A. Bluvas of counsel), for appellant.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Paul B. Lyons of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), renderedJune 21, 2018, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of operating as a majortrafficker.

Following a lengthy investigation, defendant was charged in an indictment with 15 counts ofvarious drug-related and weapons crimes.^[FN*]The indictment contained a total of 86 countsagainst 57 codefendants.

We affirm. Initially, we reject defendant's contention that his waiver of the right to appealwas not knowing, intelligent and voluntary. At the outset of the plea proceeding, defendant wasadvised that a waiver of the right to appeal was a condition of the plea agreement, and he bothacknowledged his understanding that he was required to waive his right to appeal as part of theagreement and his willingness to do so. County Court then explained to defendant that his waiverof appellate rights was separate and distinct from the trial-related rights automatically forfeitedby his guilty plea, specified the types of issues that were not waived and ascertained thatdefendant had sufficient time to confer with counsel and had no questions (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248,256 [2006]; People v Snare, 174AD3d 1222, 1222-1223 [2019], lv denied 34 NY3d 984 [2019]). Defendant, inconsultation with counsel, then read the thorough written appeal waiver and signed it afterconfirming that he understood the rights being waived and was acting voluntarily (see People v Sabin, 179 AD3d1401, 1402 [2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 995 [2020]). Accordingly, we find thatdefendant's combined oral and written waiver of appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary(see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 256; People v Bowden, 177 AD3d 1037, 1038 [2019], lv denied34 NY3d 1157 [2020]; see also People vThomas, 34 NY3d 545, 558-563 [2019]). Given defendant's valid waiver of appeal, he isforeclosed from now challenging the agreed-upon, lawful sentence as harsh and excessive(see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 256; People v Thacker, 173 AD3d 1360, 1361 [2019], lv denied34 NY3d 938 [2019]; see also Penal Law § 70.71 [5]; People v Pacherille, 25 NY3d1021, 1023 [2015]).

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Devine, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur. Ordered that thejudgment is affirmed.