| People v Pringle |
| 2017 NY Slip Op 07633 [155 AD3d 1085] |
| November 2, 2017 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v IsaiahPringle, Appellant. |
Stephen W. Herrick, Public Defender, Albany (Theresa Suozzi of counsel), forappellant.
P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Michael C. Wetmore of counsel), forrespondent.
Egan Jr., J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Lynch, J.),rendered April 18, 2014, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of attemptedburglary in the second degree, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the firstdegree and driving while intoxicated.
Defendant waived indictment and pleaded guilty to two superior court informations, charginghim with attempted burglary in the second degree, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motorvehicle in the first degree and driving while intoxicated, and the plea agreement included thewaiver of the right to appeal. County Court thereafter sentenced him to the agreed-uponaggregate prison term of six years, to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision.Defendant appeals.
We affirm. To the extent that defendant contends that he waived his right to appeal withoutrealizing the ramifications thereof, we disagree. County Court distinguished the right to appealfrom those rights automatically forfeited by pleading guilty, and defendant affirmed hisunderstanding thereof and agreed to waive the right to appeal. Additionally, defendant executed awritten appeal waiver in open court after discussing the waiver with counsel. In our view,defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his conviction andsentence (see People v Mahon, 148AD3d 1303, 1303 [2017]; People vSamuel, 143 AD3d 1012, 1012 [2016]). Given the valid waiver of the right to appeal,defendant's contention that his sentence is harsh and excessive is precluded (see People v Caldwell, 148 AD3d1468, 1468 [2017]; People vRhodes, 143 AD3d 1011, 1012 [2016]).
Although defendant's claim that his plea was involuntary due to the ineffective assistance ofcounsel survives his appeal waiver, it is unpreserved for our review as the record does not reflectthat he made an appropriate postallocution motion (see People v Dolberry, 147 AD3d 1149, 1150 [2017], lvdenied 29 NY3d 1078 [2017]; People v Cox, 146 AD3d 1154, 1155 [2017]). We note that themajority of the issues raised—including counsel's failure to investigate potential defensesand trial strategy—involve matters outside of the record and are more properly the subjectof a CPL article 440 motion (see Peoplev Griffin, 134 AD3d 1228, 1230 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 1132 [2016]).
Garry, J.P., Devine, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.