Opinion
June 8, 2001.
(Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, D'Amico, J. — Attempted Burglary, 2nd Degree.)
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., HAYES, WISNER, SCUDDER AND LAWTON, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
The record establishes that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal ( see, People v. Kemp, 94 N.Y.2d 831, 833; People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 735; People v. Moissett, 76 N.Y.2d 909, 910-911; People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 11-12). The unrestricted waiver of the right to appeal encompasses defendant's contention that County Court's inquiry concerning the qualifications of the sign language interpreter was insufficient ( see, People v. Harley, 219 A.D.2d 850). In any event, the record establishes that the sign language interpreter was identified as a "certified" interpreter, was sworn to act as a sign language interpreter, and served in that capacity without objection ( see, People v. Harley, supra). Thus, on this record, we need not reach the issue whether the court conducted a sufficient inquiry to determine whether the sign language interpreter satisfied the credential requirements of Judiciary Law § 390 ( cf., People v. Harley, supra). Defendant's unrestricted waiver of the right to appeal also encompasses defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence ( see, People v. Hidalgo, supra, at 734). In any event, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.