| People v Walton |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 00476 [168 AD3d 1001] |
| January 23, 2019 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Taqiy Walton, Appellant. |
Marianne Karas, Thornwood, NY, for appellant.
Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, NY (Brian R. Pouliot and WilliamC. Milaccio of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Anne E.Minihan, J.), rendered January 11, 2017, convicting him of assault in the first degree, attemptedassault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon hisplea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Although the defendant validly waived his right to appeal (see People v Sanders, 25 NY3d337, 340-342 [2015]; People vRamos, 7 NY3d 737 [2006]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Muniz,91 NY2d 570, 575 [1998]), his contentions concerning the voluntariness of his plea of guiltysurvive his appeal waiver (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]; People v Molina, 146 AD3d 815[2017]; People v Lujan, 114 AD3d963 [2014]; People v Persaud,109 AD3d 626 [2013]). However, the defendant's contentions that his plea was not knowing,voluntary, or intelligent, and that it was coerced by the remarks of the County Court and theprosecutor regarding the sentencing promise, are unpreserved for appellate review, since thedefendant did not move to vacate his plea or otherwise raise these issues before the court (seePeople v Clarke, 93 NY2d 904, 906 [1999]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665[1988]; People v Mitchell, 156AD3d 817, 818 [2017]; People vMcCracken, 138 AD3d 1147 [2016]; People v Perez, 51 AD3d 1043 [2008]). In any event, certainremarks at the outset of the plea proceeding, that the People's prior offer was no longer availableand that their current offer would no longer be available if the defendant proceeded with thesuppression hearings, were informative and not coercive (see People v Marryshow, 135 AD3d 964 [2016]; see also People v Guzman, 28 AD3d396, 397 [2006]). Moreover, the defendant's claims are belied by the record, which revealsthat the defendant acknowledged under oath that he was not threatened, coerced, or forced toplead guilty, and that he was entering the plea freely and voluntarily (see People v Weston, 145 AD3d746, 747 [2016]; People vMcVay, 140 AD3d 1090, 1090 [2016]; People v Ward, 140 AD3d 903, 904 [2016]).
The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of hiscontention that the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d at10). Rivera, J.P., Chambers, Cohen and Barros, JJ., concur.