Opinion
06-17-2016
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Michael D. JOHNSON, Defendant–Appellant.
Anthony J. Lana, Buffalo, for Defendant–Appellant. Niagara County District Attorney's Office, Lockport (Thomas H. Brandt of Counsel), for Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Sara S. Farkas, J.), rendered July 15, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the first degree.
Anthony J. Lana, Buffalo, for Defendant–Appellant.
Niagara County District Attorney's Office, Lockport (Thomas H. Brandt of Counsel), for Respondent.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM:
On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35[4] ), defendant contends that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. We conclude that defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived the right to appeal (see generally People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ), and that valid waiver encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see generally People v. Lococo, 92 N.Y.2d 825, 827, 677 N.Y.S.2d 57, 699 N.E.2d 416 ; People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 737, 675 N.Y.S.2d 327, 698 N.E.2d 46 ). During the plea colloquy, County Court made clear to defendant that the right to appeal was separate and distinct from the other rights that are automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty (see People v. Rausch, 126 A.D.3d 1535, 1535, 6 N.Y.S.3d 863, lv. denied 26 N.Y.3d 1149, 32 N.Y.S.3d 63, 51 N.E.3d 574 ; cf. People v. VanHooser [Appeal No. 2], 126 A.D.3d 1531, 1532, 6 N.Y.S.3d 361 ), and the court further explained that the waiver precluded defendant from challenging either the conviction or the severity of his sentence (cf. People v. Maracle, 19 N.Y.3d 925, 928, 950 N.Y.S.2d 498, 973 N.E.2d 1272 ). In any event, based on our review of the record, we perceive no basis upon which to modify the sentence as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[6][b] ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, CURRAN, and TROUTMAN, JJ., concur.