Opinion
2014-03-21
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tevin MORROW, Defendant–Appellant.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Kristin M. Preve of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (David A. Heraty of Counsel), for Respondent.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Kristin M. Preve of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (David A. Heraty of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, PERADOTTO, and WHALEN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10[3] ), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. We reject that contention ( see generally People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145;People v. Ripley, 94 A.D.3d 1554, 1554, 942 N.Y.S.2d 919,lv. denied19 N.Y.3d 976, 950 N.Y.S.2d 359, 973 N.E.2d 769). The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his contention concerning the severity of the sentence ( see People v. Lococo, 92 N.Y.2d 825, 827, 677 N.Y.S.2d 57, 699 N.E.2d 416;People v. Raynor, 107 A.D.3d 1567, 1568, 966 N.Y.S.2d 716). Contrary to defendant's further contention, even assuming, arguendo, that there was sufficient evidence of “mitigating circumstances that bear directly upon the manner in which the crime was committed” to render defendant eligible for youthful offender status (CPL 720.10[3][i] ), we nevertheless conclude that County Court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant him youthful offender status under the circumstances of this case ( see People v. Fowler–Graham, 92 A.D.3d 1225, 1226, 937 N.Y.S.2d 906,lv. denied19 N.Y.3d 960, 950 N.Y.S.2d 112, 973 N.E.2d 210;People v. Scott, 31 A.D.3d 1190, 1191, 817 N.Y.S.2d 548;People v. Terry, 19 A.D.3d 1039, 1040, 797 N.Y.S.2d 670,lv. denied5 N.Y.3d 833, 804 N.Y.S.2d 48, 837 N.E.2d 747).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.