Opinion
432 KA 16–01260
04-27-2018
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Valvano YAZZIE, Defendant–Appellant. (Appeal No. 1.)
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (TIMOTHY P. MURPHY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DAVID A. HERATY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (TIMOTHY P. MURPHY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DAVID A. HERATY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Memorandum:
In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree ( Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.50[2] ) and, in appeal No. 2, he appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of felony driving while intoxicated ( Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1192[3] ; 1193[1][c][i] ). The two pleas were entered in a single plea proceeding. With respect to both appeals, defendant contends that the waiver of the right to appeal is not valid. We reject that contention and conclude that Supreme Court engaged defendant "in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice" ( People v. Marshall, 144 A.D.3d 1544, 1545, 41 N.Y.S.3d 337 [4th Dept. 2016] [internal quotation marks omitted] ). The valid waiver of the right to appeal forecloses our review of defendant's contention that the sentence in each appeal is unduly harsh and severe (see generally People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 255, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 [2006] ; People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 737, 675 N.Y.S.2d 327, 698 N.E.2d 46 [1998] ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.