Opinion
1268 KA 18–00446
12-20-2019
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (DEBORAH K. JESSEY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MICHAEL J. HILLERY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (DEBORAH K. JESSEY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MICHAEL J. HILLERY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of, inter alia, robbery in the first degree ( Penal Law § 160.15[3] ). Contrary to defendant's contention, " ‘the waiver of the right to appeal was not rendered invalid based on [County Court's] failure to require [him] to articulate the waiver in his own words’ " ( People v. Scheifla, 166 A.D.3d 1531, 1532, 85 N.Y.S.3d 826 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1177, 97 N.Y.S.3d 613, 121 N.E.3d 241 [2019] ; see People v. Bridges, 144 A.D.3d 1582, 1582–1583, 40 N.Y.S.3d 825 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 1143, 52 N.Y.S.3d 294, 74 N.E.3d 679 [2017] ). Moreover, the lack of a written waiver "is of no moment where, as here, the oral waiver was adequate" ( People v. Smith, 164 A.D.3d 1621, 1621, 84 N.Y.S.3d 287 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1177, 97 N.Y.S.3d 608, 121 N.E.3d 235 [2019] ). Contrary to defendant's further contention, his valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenges to the suppression ruling (see People v. Kemp, 94 N.Y.2d 831, 833, 703 N.Y.S.2d 59, 724 N.E.2d 754 [1999] ; People v. Wright, 158 A.D.3d 1068, 1069, 70 N.Y.S.3d 682 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1019, 78 N.Y.S.3d 289, 102 N.E.3d 1070 [2018] ), and to the severity of the sentence (see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 255–256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 [2006] ; Scheifla, 166 A.D.3d at 1532, 85 N.Y.S.3d 826 ).