Opinion
1031 KA 17-01291
11-15-2019
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. CORDERO RUMPH, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (JAMES M. SPECYAL OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. LORI P. RIEMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LITTLE VALLEY, FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT:
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (JAMES M. SPECYAL OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LORI P. RIEMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LITTLE VALLEY, FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Ronald D. Ploetz, J.), rendered June 13, 2016. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 220.39 [1]). Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes that he knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). It is well settled that a " court need not engage in any particular litany when apprising a defendant pleading guilty of the individual rights abandoned' " (People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337, 341 [2015]) and, here, the record establishes that County 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 Carr, 147 AD3d 1506, 1506 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1030 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]). That valid waiver forecloses any challenge by defendant to the severity of the sentence (see generally People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; People v Lasher, 151 AD3d 1774, 1775 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1129 [2017]).
Entered: November 15, 2019
Mark W. Bennett
Clerk of the Court