| People v Foy |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 08773 [89 AD3d 1103] |
| November 29, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ryan Foy,Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Amy Appelbaum ofcounsel; Reuben Arnold on the memorandum), for respondent.
Appeals by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from three sentences of the Supreme Court,Kings County (Gary, J., on indictment No. 7036/08; Foley, J., on indictment Nos. 7617/08 and9970/08), all imposed April 17, 2009, on the ground that the sentences were excessive.
Ordered that the sentences are affirmed.
The defendant's valid waivers of his right to appeal from the judgments of conviction of attemptedrobbery in the second degree, in satisfaction of Kings County indictment No. 7617/08, and robbery inthe third degree, in satisfaction of Kings County indictment No. 9970/08, preclude review of hiscontentions that the sentences imposed thereon were excessive (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255[2006]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 735 [1998]; People v Pertillar, 37 AD3d 740 [2007]). The defendant did not validlywaive his right to appeal from the judgment of conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in thesecond degree, in satisfaction of Kings County indictment No. 7036/08 (see People v Bradshaw, 76 AD3d 566[2010], lv granted 15 NY3d 896 [2010]; cf. People v Ramos, 7 NY3d at 738). Thedefendant, however, cannot be heard to complain that his sentence was excessive since he received thesentence promised to him during the plea proceedings (see People v Martinez, 78 AD3d 966 [2010]). Prudenti, P.J., Mastro,Angiolillo, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.