People v. Ramsey

Full title: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Kalik RAMSEY, appellant.

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 2, 2014

116 A.D.3d 717 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 2318

983 N.Y.S.2d 103

Opinion

2014-04-2

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Kalik RAMSEY, appellant.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Janet Claire Lê of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Janet Claire Lê of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott of counsel), for respondent.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., PLUMMER E. LOTT, LEONARD B. AUSTIN, and ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.), rendered November 18, 2011, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court told the defendant that, as a condition of his plea agreement, he was required to waive his right to appeal. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the court did not tell him that an appeal waiver was a mandatory part of every guilty plea, and nothing in the court's colloquy could be interpreted so broadly. Moreover, the court expressly told the defendant that the appeal waiver encompassed any hearings that had already been held in the case. Therefore, the defendant's challenges to the validity and scope of his waiver of the right to appeal are without merit ( see People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 11, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968, 541 N.E.2d 1022;cf. People v. Muniz, 91 N.Y.2d 570, 573, 673 N.Y.S.2d 358, 696 N.E.2d 182). Further, the defendant has not drawn our attention to any other circumstance which might otherwise warrant our declining to enforce the appeal waiver. Accordingly, appellate review of the defendant's contentions relating to a suppression ruling is precluded ( see People v. Montane, 110 A.D.3d 1101, 1101, 974 N.Y.S.2d 257,lv. denied22 N.Y.3d 1089, 981 N.Y.S.2d 675;People v. Holman, 33 A.D.3d 815, 815, 826 N.Y.S.2d 287;People v. Sloane, 13 A.D.3d 400, 400, 785 N.Y.S.2d 538).