| People v Campbell |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 00907 [114 AD3d 996] |
| February 13, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vTerrell Campbell, Appellant. |
—[*1] P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Steven M. Sharp of counsel), forrespondent.
McCarthy, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County(Breslin, J.), rendered November 22, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guiltyof the crime of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (twocounts).
Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrumentin the second degree in full satisfaction of an indictment that charged him with eightcounts of that crime. The terms of the plea agreement included an oral and written waiverof appeal and a commitment of a sentence not exceeding prison terms of 1½ to4½ years on each count, to run consecutively. County Court thereafter sentenceddefendant to consecutive prison terms of 1 to 3 years, and defendant appeals.
To the extent that defendant challenges the validity of his waiver of appeal, thisargument is without merit. County Court distinguished the right to appeal from the rightsautomatically forfeited upon a guilty plea and defendant stated that he understood andwas voluntarily relinquishing this right and he then executed a written waiver of appeal(see People v Chaney, 70AD3d 1251, 1252 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 748 [2010]). Turning todefendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his plea, while not precluded by the waiverof his right to appeal, the record does not reflect that this argument was preserved by anappropriate motion to withdraw the plea or vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v McGowan, 98AD3d 1192, [*2]1192 [2012]; People vAngus, 303 AD2d 829, 829 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 536 [2003]). Thenarrow exception to the preservation rule is not implicated here, as nothing in the pleacolloquy casts doubt upon defendant's guilt (see People v Audette, 108 AD3d 943, 944 [2013]; People v Ward, 2 AD3d1219, 1219 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 808 [2004]). Defendant's argumentthat the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive is foreclosed by his valid waiver of theright to appeal (see People v Audette, 108 AD3d at 944; People vChaney, 70 AD3d at 1253).
Garry, Rose and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.