| People v Rivera |
| 2018 NY Slip Op 06153 [164 AD3d 1543] |
| September 20, 2018 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Amir Rivera, Also Known as Stacks,Appellant. |
G. Scott Walling, Slingerlands, for appellant.
Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Tracey A. Brunecz of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Loyola, J.), renderedDecember 3, 2015, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of acontrolled substance in the third degree.
In satisfaction of three indictments charging defendant with multiple drug-related and othercrimes, he pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and waivedhis right to appeal, both orally and in writing. In accordance with the terms of the plea agreement,he was sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term of six years followed by two yearsof postrelease supervision, to run concurrently to a sentence of one year in jail that was imposedupon his conviction of attempted burglary in the second degree following his violation ofprobation. Defendant appeals.
Initially, we find defendant's appeal waiver to be invalid. Significantly, the record does notdisclose that defendant was advised of the separate and distinct nature of the waiver or that hefully understood its many ramifications (see People v Levielle, 161 AD3d 1391, 1392 [2018]; People v Hart, 160 AD3d 1137,1138 [2018]). Although defendant's challenge to the severity of his sentence is not precluded, wefind that the sentence is neither harsh nor excessive. Defendant's criminal record includes priordrug-related offenses, and he was on probation for an attempted burglary conviction at the timethat he committed the crime at issue. In addition, he consented to the sentence as part of thefavorable plea agreement disposing of three indictments charging him with a total of 50 crimes.Consequently, we find no extraordinary circumstances or abuse of discretion warranting areduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Braye, 161 AD3d 1381, 1381 [2018]; People v Treceno, 160 AD3d1216, 1216 [2018]). Finally, we note that County Court sentenced defendant as a secondfelony offender, but this is not reflected in the uniform sentence and commitment form containedin the record. Consequently, the uniform sentence and commitment form must be amendedaccordingly (see People v [*2]Morrow, 163 AD3d 1265, 1266 [2018]; People v Patterson, 119 AD3d1157, 1159 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 1046 [2014]).
McCarthy, J.P., Devine, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgmentis affirmed, and matter remitted for entry of an amended uniform sentence and commitmentform.