People v Gramza
2016 NY Slip Op 04540 [140 AD3d 1643]
June 10, 2016
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 3, 2016


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vDebora K. Gramza, Appellant. (Appeal No. 1.)

The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Sherry A. Chase of counsel), fordefendant-appellant.

Michael J. Flaherty, Jr., Acting District Attorney, Buffalo (Daniel J. Punch ofcounsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Kenneth F. Case, J.), renderedJanuary 22, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of grandlarceny in the second degree and falsifying business records in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimouslyaffirmed.

Memorandum: In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting herupon her plea of guilty of grand larceny in the second degree (Penal Law§ 155.40 [1]) and falsifying business records in the first degree(§ 175.10). Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes thatshe knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived the right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez,6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Frank, 258 AD2d 900, 900-901 [1999],lv denied 93 NY2d 924 [1999]), and that valid waiver forecloses any challengeby defendant to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255; seegenerally People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; People v Hidalgo, 91NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).

In appeal No. 2, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea ofguilty of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (Penal Law former§ 175.35). We agree with defendant that her waiver of the right to appealwas invalid inasmuch as she pleaded guilty to the sole count in the superior courtinformation without receiving a sentencing commitment or any other consideration (see People v Collins, 129AD3d 1676, 1676 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 1038 [2015]; cf.Frank, 258 AD2d at 900-901), but we nevertheless reject her challenge to theseverity of the sentence. Present—Peradotto, J.P., Carni, Lindley, Curran andTroutman, JJ.


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.