| People v Johnson |
| 2020 NY Slip Op 02576 [183 AD3d 1256] |
| May 1, 2020 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Holiday Johnson, Appellant. |
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Barbara J. Davies of counsel), fordefendant-appellant.
John J. Flynn, District Attorney, Buffalo (Matthew B. Powers of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Michael F. Pietruszka, J.),rendered May 14, 2018. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty ofcriminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimouslyaffirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea ofguilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law§ 265.03 [3]). We agree with the People that the record establishes thatdefendant validly waived his right to appeal. County Court engaged defendant in "anadequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing andvoluntary choice" (People vKastenhuber, 180 AD3d 1333, 1334 [4th Dept 2020] [internal quotation marksomitted]; see generally People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 559-560 [2019]). Contrary to defendant's contention, the court was "notrequired to engage in any particular litany in order to obtain a valid waiver of the right toappeal . . . , and the waiver is not invalid on the ground that the court didnot specifically inform defendant that his general waiver of the right to appealencompassed the court's suppression ruling[ ]" (People v Babagana, 176 AD3d 1627, 1627 [4th Dept2019], lv denied 34 NY3d 1075 [2019] [internal quotation marks omitted]).Moreover, we conclude that the court did not conflate defendant's waiver of the right toappeal with those rights automatically forfeited by a guilty plea (see generally People vBradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264 [2011]; People v Sallard, 175 AD3d 1839, 1839 [4th Dept2019]).
Defendant's "valid waiver of the right to appeal forecloses [his] challenges to thecourt's suppression ruling" (Kastenhuber, 180 AD3d at 1334; see also Peoplev Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]). The valid waiver also "forecloses his challengeto the severity of the sentence" (People v Sanders, 180 AD3d 1327, 1328 [4th Dept 2020]).Present—Centra, J.P., NeMoyer, Troutman, Winslow and Bannister,JJ.