People v. Azpeitia
This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 06719 (People v. Azpeitia) 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.
Opinion
People v Azpeitia (2025 NY Slip Op 06719)
| People v Azpeitia |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 06719 |
| Decided on December 3, 2025 |
| Appellate Division, Second 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 on December 3, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
BETSY BARROS, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
LINDA CHRISTOPHER
JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ.
2023-10771
(Ind. No. 70122/23)
v
Salvador Azpeitia, appellant.
N. Scott Banks, Hempstead, NY (Tammy Feman and Elizabeth Walker of counsel), for appellant.
Anne T. Donnelly, District Attorney, Mineola, NY (Daniel Bresnahan and Kevin C. King of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christopher Hoefenkrieg, J.), rendered August 17, 2023, convicting him of forcible touching (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, his waiver of the right to appeal was valid (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 254, 257; People v Stevens, 203 AD3d 958). The defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes appellate review of his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v Prenaj, 239 AD3d 1001).
The question of whether the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent survived his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Ricottilli, 235 AD3d 1013). "Whether a plea is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent depends on the totality of the circumstances," involving an assessment of factors that go beyond any inaccurate statement of a defendant's sentencing exposure to include "'the nature and terms of the agreement, the reasonableness of the bargain, and the age and experience of the accused'" (People v Scott, ___ NY3d ___, ___, 2025 NY Slip Op 01562, *5, quoting People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 736). Under the totality of the circumstances presented here, the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Drake, 199 AD3d 827; People v Principato, 194 AD3d 851).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
BARROS, J.P., CHAMBERS, CHRISTOPHER and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 NY Slip Op 06719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-azpeitia-nyappdiv-2025.