Crimes - Appeal - Validity of Appeal Waiver - Constitutional Challenges to Probation Condition Foreclosed

Crimes - Sentence - Probation - Condition of Probation

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Audrey E. Stone, J.), rendered September27, 2023, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree,and sentencing him to a jail term of six months, with five years of probation,unanimously affirmed.

Defendant validly waived his right to appeal (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545 [2019], certdenied 589 US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]), which forecloses review of hisexcessive sentence claim. In any event, we perceive no basis for reducing thesentence.

Defendant's challenge to the condition of his probation requiring him to "[a]voidinjurious or vicious habits; refrain from frequenting unlawful or disreputable places; and. . . not consort with disreputable people" pursuant to Penal Law§ 65.10 (2) survives defendant's waiver of the right to appeal and does notrequire preservation (see Peoplev Alvarez, 233 AD3d 619, 620 [1st Dept 2024], lv denied 43 NY3d 961[2025]). Nevertheless, the court providently exercised its discretion in deeming thiscondition "reasonably necessary to insure that the defendant will lead a law-abiding lifeor to assist him to do so" (Penal Law § 65.10 [1]), given his criminal historyof trespass, drug possession, and aggression toward others, as well as the Department ofProbation's recommendation that defendant participate in anger management servicesbased on the violent nature of his actions in the underlying offense.

Defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal forecloses review of his facialconstitutional challenges to the probation condition under the First Amendment and thevagueness doctrine (see Peoplev Johnson, 225 AD3d 453, 454 [1st Dept 2024], lv granted 42 NY3d939 [2024]; People vLowndes, 239 AD3d 574, 575 [1st Dept 2025]). In any event, those claims areunpreserved, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice (see People v Cabrera, 41 NY3d35, 42-51 [2023]; Lowndes, 239 AD3d at 575; see also People v Baumann &Sons Buses, Inc., 6 NY3d 404, 408 [2006]). Concur—Webber, J.P.,Kapnick, Gesmer, Higgitt, Hagler, JJ.