| People v Hicks |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 08062 [89 AD3d 1480] |
| November 10, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles Hicks,Appellant. |
—[*1] Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Michelle L. Cianciosa of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Russell P. Buscaglia, A.J.), renderedDecember 9, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery inthe first degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of attemptedrobbery in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.15 [4]), defendant contends thathis waiver of the right to appeal was invalid. We reject that contention. Despite defendant's contentionto the contrary, the record establishes that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right toappeal as a condition of the plea bargain (seegenerally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). Supreme Court "engage[d] thedefendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing andvoluntary choice" (People v James, 71AD3d 1465, 1465 [2010] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and the record establishes thatdefendant " 'understood that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automaticallyforfeited upon a plea of guilty' " (People vDunham, 83 AD3d 1423, 1424 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 794 [2011], quotingLopez, 6 NY3d at 256). The challenge by defendant to the court's suppression ruling isencompassed by his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831,833 [1999]; People v Williams, 49AD3d 1281 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 940 [2008]). Present—Centra, J.P.,Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Martoche, JJ.