People v. Blackwell

2026 NY Slip Op 00791
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 11, 2026
Docket2024-08073
StatusPublished

This text of 2026 NY Slip Op 00791 (People v. Blackwell) 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. Blackwell, 2026 NY Slip Op 00791 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

People v Blackwell (2026 NY Slip Op 00791)
People v Blackwell
2026 NY Slip Op 00791
Decided on February 11, 2026
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 February 11, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
WILLIAM G. FORD
LOURDES M. VENTURA
SUSAN QUIRK, JJ.

2024-08073

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

v

Troy Blackwell, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 62/23, 70670/23)


Arza R. Feldman, Manhasset, NY, for appellant.

Anthony P. Parisi, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Winter A. Vega of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Jessica Segal, J.), rendered August 6, 2024, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contentions that the sentence imposed was excessive and constituted cruel and unusual punishment (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256; People v Nesbitt, ___ AD3d ___, 2025 NY Slip Op 07316).

Although the defendant's contention that the County Court improperly delegated its authority during sentencing survives the defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal, that contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Guin, 229 AD3d 567, 568). In any event, that contention is without merit.

The defendant's remaining contention, challenging the imposition of a civil forfeiture of certain currency, is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Coleman, 138 AD3d 1014, 1015) and, in any event, without merit (see People v Latouche, 243 AD3d 683).

IANNACCI, J.P., FORD, VENTURA and QUIRK, 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

People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Coleman
138 A.D.3d 1014 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. Nesbitt
2025 NY Slip Op 07316 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2026 NY Slip Op 00791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-blackwell-nyappdiv-2026.