From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Provost

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Mar 12, 2020
181 A.D.3d 1059 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

110324

03-12-2020

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tyler E. PROVOST, Appellant.

Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Kristin A. Bluvas of counsel), for appellant. Gary M. Pasqua, District Attorney, Canton (Alexander A.V. Nichols of counsel), for respondent.


Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Kristin A. Bluvas of counsel), for appellant.

Gary M. Pasqua, District Attorney, Canton (Alexander A.V. Nichols of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Clark, J.P., Aarons, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Champagne, J.), rendered April 24, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the second degree.

Following his sexual encounter with the then–14–year–old victim, defendant was indicted and charged with one count of rape in the first degree and one count of rape in the second degree. In full satisfaction of that indictment and other pending charges, defendant agreed to plead guilty to rape in the second degree in exchange for a prison term of seven years followed by 15 years of postrelease supervision. The plea agreement also required defendant to waive his right to appeal. Defendant thereafter pleaded guilty in conformity with the plea agreement, and County Court sentenced defendant as a second felony offender to the contemplated term of imprisonment. This appeal by defendant followed.

We affirm. County Court sufficiently explained the nature of the waiver of the right to appeal, and defendant, in turn, expressed his understanding of the appellate rights being waived and his willingness to relinquish those rights (see People v. Boyette, 175 A.D.3d 751, 752, 103 N.Y.S.3d 870 [2019], lv . denied 34 N.Y.3d 979, 113 N.Y.S.3d 648, 137 N.E.3d 18 [2019] ; People v. Walker, 166 A.D.3d 1393, 1393–1394, 86 N.Y.S.3d 920 [2018] ). Although the court's oral colloquy did not include the words "separate and distinct," County Court "was not required to engage in any particular colloquy or utter any specific words in order to ensure that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary" ( People v. Douglas, 168 A.D.3d 1285, 1285, 91 N.Y.S.3d 814 [2019] ), and the written waiver executed by defendant in open court clearly apprised defendant that his "right to appeal [was] separate and distinct from those rights ... automatically forfeit[ed] by [his] plea of guilty" (see People v. Gamble , 177 A.D.3d 1042, 1042, 110 N.Y.S.3d 344 [2019], lv . denied 34 N.Y.3d 1128, 118 N.Y.S.3d 541, 141 N.E.3d 497, 2020 WL 696818 [Jan. 31, 2020] ; People v. Boyette, 175 A.D.3d at 752, 103 N.Y.S.3d 870 ). In response to County Court's questioning, defendant confirmed that his signature on the written waiver evidenced his understanding of that document and assured the court that he had been afforded sufficient time to confer with counsel (see People v. Lago, 168 A.D.3d 1281, 1281, 91 N.Y.S.3d 818 [2019] ; People v. Gilliam, 162 A.D.3d 1413, 1414, 79 N.Y.S.3d 754 [2018], lv . denied 32 N.Y.3d 1064, 89 N.Y.S.3d 119, 113 N.E.3d 953 [2018] ). Under these circumstances, and as we discern no other infirmity in the appeal waiver (compare People v. Thomas, ––– N.Y.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, ––– N.E.3d ––––, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 08545, 2019 WL 6312521 [2019] ; People v. Barrales, 179 A.D.3d 1313, 118 N.Y.S.3d 263 [2020] ), we find that defendant's combined oral and written waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see People v. Boyette, 175 A.D.3d at 752, 103 N.Y.S.3d 870 ; People v. Walker, 166 A.D.3d at 1394, 86 N.Y.S.3d 920 ). In light of the valid appeal waiver, defendant is precluded from challenging the agreed-upon sentence as harsh and excessive (see People v. Gamble , 177 A.D.3d at 1043, 110 N.Y.S.3d 344 ; People v. Breithaupt, 171 A.D.3d 1311, 1312, 95 N.Y.S.3d 911 [2019], lv . denied 34 N.Y.3d 979, 113 N.Y.S.3d 645, 137 N.E.3d 15 [2019] ).

Clark, J.P., Aarons, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Provost

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Mar 12, 2020
181 A.D.3d 1059 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

People v. Provost

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tyler E. Provost…

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

Date published: Mar 12, 2020

Citations

181 A.D.3d 1059 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
117 N.Y.S.3d 897
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 1674

Citing Cases

People v. Muller

During the plea colloquy, County Court sufficiently explained that the appeal waiver was separate and apart…

People v. Crossley

Contrary to defendant's assertion, we find that his waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent…