People v. Andrews

2025 NY Slip Op 06763
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 4, 2025
DocketCR-24-0413
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 06763 (People v. Andrews) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Andrews, 2025 NY Slip Op 06763 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

People v Andrews (2025 NY Slip Op 06763)

People v Andrews
2025 NY Slip Op 06763
Decided on December 4, 2025
Appellate Division, Third Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered:December 4, 2025

CR-24-0413

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Rasheem Andrews, Appellant.


Calendar Date:November 14, 2025
Before:Clark, J.P., Aarons, Pritzker, Fisher and Powers, JJ.

Arnold S. Kronick, Tarrytown, for appellant.

Lee C. Kindlon, District Attorney, Albany (Emily Schulz of counsel), for respondent.



Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Andra Ackerman, J.), rendered October 23, 2023, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

In July 2022, defendant waived indictment, agreed to be prosecuted by superior court information (hereinafter SCI) and pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, in full satisfaction of the SCI and another pending charge. Pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement, defendant was required to enter a waiver of appeal and no promise was made as to the sentence to be imposed. County Court subsequently sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to a 10-year prison term, to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that this Court should reduce his sentence in the interest of justice; however, his unchallenged waiver of the right to appeal precludes this claim (see People v Hardy, ___ AD3d ___, ___, 242 NYS3d 431, 431 [3d Dept 2025]; People v Malu, 200 AD3d 1350, 1351 [3d Dept 2021]; see also People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 8-10 [1989]).

Clark, J.P., Aarons, Pritzker, Fisher and Powers, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.



Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Malu
2021 NY Slip Op 07038 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Seaberg
541 N.E.2d 1022 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 NY Slip Op 06763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-andrews-nyappdiv-2025.