Opinion
2019–13190 Ind. No. 1127/18
03-24-2021
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Charles WATTS, appellant.
Jillian S. Harrington, Staten Island, NY, for appellant. Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Sarah S. Rabinowitz and Benjamin Kussman of counsel), for respondent.
Jillian S. Harrington, Staten Island, NY, for appellant.
Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Sarah S. Rabinowitz and Benjamin Kussman of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Terence P. Murphy, J., at plea; Howard E. Sturim, J., at sentence), rendered October 21, 2019, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was charged in an indictment with five counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, five counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, five counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, five counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and five counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, related to alleged drug sales that occurred on five separate dates. The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree in satisfaction of all the charges in the indictment.
The defendant's contention that his plea was coerced is unpreserved for appellate review because he did not move to vacate his plea or otherwise raise the issue before the Supreme Court (see People v. Clarke, 93 N.Y.2d 904, 906, 690 N.Y.S.2d 501, 712 N.E.2d 668 ). In any event, the contention is without merit (see People v. Monroe, 174 A.D.3d 649, 650, 104 N.Y.S.3d 696 ; People v. Walton, 168 A.D.3d 1001, 1001, 90 N.Y.S.3d 543 ; People v. Bush, 132 A.D.3d 691, 691–692, 17 N.Y.S.3d 497 ; People v. Bravo, 72 A.D.3d 697, 698, 899 N.Y.S.2d 280 ).
The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal (see People v. Bisono, 36 N.Y.3d 1013, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, ––– N.E.3d ––––, 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 07484 ; People v. Thomas, 34 N.Y.3d 545, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 ) precludes appellate review of his challenge to the adverse pretrial suppression ruling pertaining to a photo array identification procedure (see People v. Kemp, 94 N.Y.2d 831, 833, 703 N.Y.S.2d 59, 724 N.E.2d 754 ; People v. Smith, 178 A.D.3d 965, 966, 112 N.Y.S.3d 522 ).
RIVERA, J.P., CHAMBERS, IANNACCI and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.