From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Fligger

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 29, 2014
117 A.D.3d 1343 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-05-29

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James W. FLIGGER Jr., Appellant.

Paul J. Connolly, Delmar, for appellant. James A. Murphy, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Ann C. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.



Paul J. Connolly, Delmar, for appellant. James A. Murphy, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Ann C. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., LAHTINEN, McCARTHY, GARRY and DEVINE, JJ.

LAHTINEN, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (Scarano, J.), rendered January 29, 2013, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of failure to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act.

Defendant waived indictment and agreed to be prosecuted by a superior court information charging him with failing to report an address change within 10 days pursuant to Correction Law § 168–f (4). Thereafter, defendant pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement and, as part of that agreement, waived his right to appeal both orally during the plea colloquy and in a written waiver. County Court then sentenced defendant to the agreed-upon prison term of 2 to 6 years and defendant now appeals, contending that his appeal waiver is invalid and that his sentence is harsh and excessive.

We affirm. Defendant signed a detailed written waiver and the record clearly established that County Court separately explained the right to appeal and defendant acknowledged that he had discussed the waiver with counsel and that he understood it. Accordingly, contrary to defendant's contention, we find that his waiver of appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary ( see People v. Fling, 112 A.D.3d 1001, 1001–1002, 975 N.Y.S.2d 923 [2013];People v. Baliraj, 101 A.D.3d 1175, 1176, 954 N.Y.S.2d 711 [2012],lv. denied 21 N.Y.3d 941, 968 N.Y.S.2d 3, 990 N.E.2d 137 [2013] ). Defendant, therefore, is precluded from challenging his sentence as harsh and excessive ( see People v. Monk, 113 A.D.3d 999, 1000, 978 N.Y.S.2d 919 [2014];People v. Maughan, 112 A.D.3d 1233, 1233, 977 N.Y.S.2d 503 [2013] ).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

PETERS, P.J., McCARTHY, GARRY and DEVINE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Fligger

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 29, 2014
117 A.D.3d 1343 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

People v. Fligger

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James W. FLIGGER Jr.…

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

Date published: May 29, 2014

Citations

117 A.D.3d 1343 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
117 A.D.3d 1343
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 3888

Citing Cases

People v. Brady

Moreover, County Court properly advised defendant that his waiver of the right to appeal was separate and…

People v. Woods

Moreover, County Court provided defendant with time to read, sign and discuss the waiver with counsel,…