People v Stoff
2010 NY Slip Op 05613 [74 AD3d 1640]
June 24, 2010
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 25, 2010


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Linda Stoff,Appellant.

[*1]Mary Elizabeth Coreno, Saratoga Springs, for appellant.

Kevin C. Kortright, District Attorney, Fort Edward (Katherine G. Henley of counsel), forrespondent.

Stein, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (McKeighan,J.), rendered October 17, 2008, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime ofcriminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degreein full satisfaction of a four-count indictment. Pursuant to the plea agreement, defendant waivedher right to appeal and was sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term of four years,to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Contrary to defendant's contention, we find that she knowingly, voluntarily andintelligently waived her right to appeal. Before defendant executed a written waiver of the rightto appeal, County Court explained the waiver to her during the plea colloquy and ensured thatshe understood the waiver and had discussed it with counsel. Thereafter, defendant, assisted bycounsel, executed a written waiver in open court that also reflected that counsel had advised herof her right to appeal, and that she had discussed the waiver with counsel and was freely waivingsuch right. Under these circumstances, defendant's appeal waiver is valid (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248,256 [2006]; People v Vaughns, 70AD3d 1123, 1124 [2010]; People vMosher, 45 AD3d 970, 970 [2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 814 [2008]).Consequently, defendant is [*2]precluded from arguing that hersentence is harsh and excessive (seePeople v Walley, 63 AD3d 1284, 1286 [2009]; People v Dixon, 62 AD3d 1214, 1215 [2009], lv denied 13NY3d 743 [2009]).

Cardona, P.J., Rose, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.