| People v Schroeder |
| 2020 NY Slip Op 01860 [181 AD3d 1095] |
| March 16, 2020 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v David M. Schroeder, Appellant. |
Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Keith F. Schockmel of counsel), forappellant.
John M. Muehl, District Attorney, Cooperstown (Michael F. Getman of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Otsego County (Burns, J.), renderedNovember 3, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminalsale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
In full satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant agreed to plead guilty to onecount of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree with theunderstanding that he would be sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term offive years followed by two years of postrelease supervision—to be servedconsecutively to the sentence he then was serving. The plea agreement also requireddefendant to waive his right to appeal. Defendant pleaded guilty in conformity with theplea agreement and was sentenced to the agreed-upon prison term. This appealensued.
Contrary to defendant's assertion, we find that his waiver of the right to appeal wasknowing, intelligent and voluntary. County Court advised defendant that the waiver wasa term and condition of the plea agreement and distinguished the right to appeal asseparate and distinct from the trial-related rights that defendant automatically wasforfeiting by pleading guilty (see People v Couse, 178 AD3d 1207, 1207-1208 [2019];People v Gagnon, 153AD3d 1451, 1452 [2017]). In return, "defendant acknowledged that he understoodthe nature of the waiver and that he was relinquishing his right to appeal [his] convictionand sentence" (People v Couse, 178 AD3d at 1208). Additionally, defendantsigned a detailed written waiver at the time of sentencing, wherein he confirmed that hehad been apprised of his appellate rights and afforded sufficient time to confer withcounsel. Although the better practice would have been for County Court to "confirm[ ]that defendant had discussed the waiver with counsel and had read the written waiverbefore signing it, the relevant facts and circumstances—including defendant'sprior experience with the criminal justice system, the oral colloquy and the detailedwritten waiver—demonstrate that defendant knowingly, intelligently andvoluntarily waived [his] right to appeal his conviction and sentence" (People v Lavalley, 150 AD3d1339, 1340 [2017]; see People v Gagnon, 153 AD3d at 1452). In light of thevalid appeal waiver, defendant's claim that the agreed-upon sentence imposed is harshand excessive is precluded (see People v Couse, 178 AD3d at 1208; People v Moore, 169 AD3d1110, 1112 [2019], lv denied 33 NY3d 979 [2019]).
Egan Jr., J.P., Mulvey, Devine, Aarons and Colangelo, JJ., concur. Ordered that thejudgment is affirmed.