| People v Young |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 08298 [112 AD3d 1068] |
| December 12, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v JamelW. Young, Appellant. |
—[*1] Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Brian Leeds of counsel), forrespondent.
Garry, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J.),rendered June 23, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime ofmanslaughter in the first degree.
Defendant pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the first degree in satisfaction of atwo-count indictment and probation violation petition, and waived his right to appeal.County Court rejected defendant's application to withdraw his plea, and sentenced him toan agreed-upon prison term of 20 years, to be followed by postrelease supervision of fiveyears. Defendant appeals.
Initially, we reject defendant's claim that he did not validly waive his right to appealhis conviction and sentence. Defense counsel indicated during the plea colloquy that hehad gone over the terms of the plea agreement with defendant, which included theexecution of a waiver of the right to appeal. County Court set out the terms of theagreement, including an extended explanation of the right he was forfeiting with thisappeal waiver, and obtained defendant's confirmation that he wished to accept the pleaagreement. Defendant then indicated that he had discussed the proposed agreement withcounsel and was satisfied with his services. Thereafter, at the time of sentencing,defendant stated that he did not understand that he had given up his [*2]right to appeal, but upon review of the record we aresatisfied that a valid waiver had been made (see People v Moissett, 76 NY2d909, 912 [1990]; People vShurock, 83 AD3d 1342, 1342-1343 [2011]; People v Deere, 8 AD3d763, 763-764 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 673 [2004]). Defendant's argumentsregarding his sentence are precluded by this valid appeal waiver (see People vSchweppe, 250 AD2d 881, 881-882 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 905 [1998]).
With respect to defendant's application to withdraw his guilty plea, such "is left tothe sound discretion of County Court, and will generally not be permitted absent someevidence of innocence, fraud or mistake in its inducement" (People v Seuffert, 104 AD3d1021, 1021 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1009 [2013] [internal quotationmarks and citations omitted]). Defendant's assertion that he was confused by the pleaagreement and felt coerced to accept it is belied by the record. He discussed a possiblejustification defense with County Court and defense counsel prior to pleading guilty,then engaged in a detailed plea colloquy in which he expressed his understanding of boththe terms of the plea agreement and the rights he was giving up by entering into it.Defendant further confirmed that he had not been threatened or forced into pleadingguilty and that he had discussed the plea agreement with defense counsel and wassatisfied with counsel's performance. We accordingly find that County Court did notabuse its discretion in denying defendant's application to withdraw the plea (see People v Wilson, 92 AD3d981, 981 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 1029 [2012]; People v Demontigny, 60AD3d 1152, 1152-1153 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 914 [2009]).
Rose, J.P., Lahtinen and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.