People v. Cochrane

2024 NY Slip Op 03208

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: June 13, 2024
• Docket: CR-22-2356
• Status: Published

Opinion

People v Cochrane (2024 NY Slip Op 03208)

People v Cochrane

2024 NY Slip Op 03208

Decided on June 13, 2024

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:June 13, 2024

CR-22-2356

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

v

Kevin C. Cochrane, Appellant.

Calendar Date:May 24, 2024
Before:Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Ceresia, McShan and Mackey, JJ.

Michael T. Baker, Public Defender, Binghamton (Marshall C. Read of counsel), for appellant.

F. Paul Battisti, District Attorney, Binghamton (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Carol A. Cocchiola, J.), rendered October 4, 2022, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted use of a child in a sexual performance as a sexually motivated felony.

In satisfaction of a nine-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted use of a child in a sexual performance as a sexually motivated felony in exchange for a sentencing cap of three years to be followed by six years of postrelease supervision. The plea agreement required a waiver of appeal. County Court thereafter sentenced defendant to a prison term of three years followed by six years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.

Defendant's sole challenge on appeal is to the perceived severity of the lawful sentence imposed.^[FN1] That argument, however, is precluded by his unchallenged oral and written waiver of appeal (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Stevens, 220 AD3d 984, 986 [3d Dept 2023]). Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Ceresia, McShan and Mackey, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Footnotes

Footnote 1: The sentence imposed was authorized for this class D felony sex offense (see Penal Law §§ 60.13, 70.45 [2-a] [a]; 70.80 [1] [a]; [4] [iii]; 110.00, 110.05 [5]; 130.91 [1], [2]; 263.05).