From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Sczepankowski

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Oct 3, 2013
110 A.D.3d 1115 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-10-3

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Richard SCZEPANKOWSKI, Appellant.

Michael I. Getz, Greenfield Center, for appellant. Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Gerald A. Dwyer of counsel), for respondent.



Michael I. Getz, Greenfield Center, for appellant. Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Gerald A. Dwyer of counsel), for respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., ROSE, LAHTINEN and GARRY, JJ.

GARRY, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Hoye, J.), rendered September 7, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant waived indictment, pleaded guilty to a superior court information charging him with driving while intoxicated and waived his right to appeal, with the understanding that he would be sentenced to 1 1/3 to 4 years in prison. County Court thereafter imposed the agreed-upon sentence. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Contrary to defendant's contention, we find that he made a valid waiver of the right to appeal, as the plea allocution and the counseled written waiver executed in open court demonstrate that he voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence ( see People v. Jerome, 98 A.D.3d 1188, 1189, 951 N.Y.S.2d 586 [2012],lv. denied20 N.Y.3d 987, 958 N.Y.S.2d 702, 982 N.E.2d 622 [2012];People v. Martinez–Velazquez, 89 A.D.3d 1318, 1319, 932 N.Y.S.2d 908 [2011] ). To the extent that defendant's claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel survives his appeal waiver, the claim is not preserved for our review as the record before us does not demonstrate that he moved to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction ( see People v. Lazore, 102 A.D.3d 1017, 1017–1018, 961 N.Y.S.2d 325 [2013];People v. Benson, 100 A.D.3d 1108, 1109, 953 N.Y.S.2d 380 [2012] ).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

PETERS, P.J., ROSE and LAHTINEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Sczepankowski

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Oct 3, 2013
110 A.D.3d 1115 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Sczepankowski

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Richard SCZEPANKOWSKI…

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

Date published: Oct 3, 2013

Citations

110 A.D.3d 1115 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
110 A.D.3d 1115
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 6404

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

We affirm. Contrary to defendant's contention, we find that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily…

People v. Smith

Were we to consider the issue, we would find that the hearing conducted was sufficient to enable County Court…