Opinion
109056
09-27-2018
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Mohammed SELIM, Appellant.
G. Scott Walling, Slingerlands, for appellant. Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Peter H. Willis of counsel), for respondent.
G. Scott Walling, Slingerlands, for appellant.
Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady (Peter H. Willis of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., McCarthy, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Sira, J.), rendered December 14, 2016, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of burglary in the second degree, criminal mischief in the third degree and possession of burglar's tools.
Defendant was indicted and charged with burglary in the second degree, criminal mischief in the third degree and possession of burglar's tools. He thereafter pleaded guilty as charged and waived the right to appeal. County Court sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 5½ years in prison, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.
We affirm. Contrary to defendant's contention, the record demonstrates that his waiver of the right to appeal was valid. Defendant was advised that an appeal waiver was a condition of the plea agreement. County Court distinguished the right to appeal from the rights automatically forfeited by a guilty plea, and defendant affirmed his understanding of the waiver. Additionally, defendant executed a written waiver in open court after discussing the waiver with counsel. Accordingly, defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see People v. White , 156 A.D.3d 1249, 1249–1250, 65 N.Y.S.3d 812 [2017], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 988, 77 N.Y.S.3d 665, 102 N.E.3d 442 [2018] ; People v. Rabine , 153 A.D.3d 1447, 1448, 59 N.Y.S.3d 716 [2017], lv denied 30 N.Y.3d 1108, 77 N.Y.S.3d 7, 101 N.E.3d 393 [2018] ). Given the valid waiver of the right to appeal, defendant's contention that his sentence is harsh and excessive is precluded (see People v. Williams , 155 A.D.3d 1253, 1254, 64 N.Y.S.3d 742 [2017], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1089, 79 N.Y.S.3d 111, 103 N.E.3d 1258 [2018] ; People v. Wright , 154 A.D.3d 1015, 1016, 60 N.Y.S.3d 860 [2017], lv denied 30 N.Y.3d 1065, 71 N.Y.S.3d 15, 94 N.E.3d 497 [2017] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Garry, P.J., McCarthy, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.