Opinion
2016-09683 Ind. No. 2556/14
01-16-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Scott K. WILSON, Appellant.
Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, NY, for appellant. Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Edward A. Bannan of counsel), for respondent.
Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, NY, for appellant.
Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Edward A. Bannan of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JEFFREY A. COHEN, BETSY BARROS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Mark D. Cohen, J.), rendered July 14, 2016, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record demonstrates that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v. Sanders, 25 N.Y.3d 337, 341–342, 12 N.Y.S.3d 593, 34 N.E.3d 344 ; People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256–257, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ).
The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent survives his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Bird, 164 A.D.3d 1357, 81 N.Y.S.3d 742 ; People v. Magnotta, 137 A.D.3d 1303, 27 N.Y.S.3d 403 ). However, the defendant failed to preserve this contention for appellate review, since he did not move to vacate his plea or otherwise raise this issue before the County Court (see People v. Ramos, 164 A.D.3d 922, 82 N.Y.S.3d 103 ; People v. Pollidore, 123 A.D.3d 1058, 1059, 997 N.Y.S.2d 752 ). In any event, the record reflects that the defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v. Seeber, 4 N.Y.3d 780, 781, 793 N.Y.S.2d 826, 826 N.E.2d 797 ; People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646 ).
The defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention regarding the mandatory surcharge (see People v. Moore, 152 A.D.3d 1088, 56 N.Y.S.3d 474 ; People v. Cota, 136 A.D.3d 1116, 1117, 24 N.Y.S.3d 537 ; People v. Morales, 119 A.D.3d 1082, 1084, 990 N.Y.S.2d 144 ; People v. Johnson, 60 A.D.3d 1496, 1497, 876 N.Y.S.2d 282 ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
RIVERA, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN and BARROS, JJ., concur.