People v. Nasworthy

67 A.D.3d 1201, 888 N.Y.S.2d 438
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 19, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 67 A.D.3d 1201 (People v. Nasworthy) 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. Nasworthy, 67 A.D.3d 1201, 888 N.Y.S.2d 438 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (Mc-Keighan, J.), rendered October 12, 2007, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant was charged in an indictment with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree. She pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in full satisfaction of the charges and waived her right to appeal. In accordance with the plea agreement, she was sentenced as a second felony offender to five years in prison, to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision, to run consecutive to any undischarged sentence. Defendant now appeals.

Defendant urges this Court to remit the matter to County Court for resentencing to include her participation in the Comprehensive Alcohol and Substance Abuse Treatment [1202]*1202program. In essence, her claim distills to an argument that the sentence imposed by County Court is harsh and excessive. Significantly, defendant does not challenge the validity of her waiver of the right to appeal, which explicitly encompassed any challenge to the severity of the sentence, and the record reveals that such waiver was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). In view of this, defendant is precluded from seeking a modification of her existing sentence (see People v Rogers, 54 AD3d 1069, 1069 [2008]; People v Collier, 52 AD3d 1121, 1122 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 786 [2008]).

Cardona, P.J., Peters, Lahtinen, Kane and Stein, 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. Sarner
2018 NY Slip Op 1085 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 A.D.3d 1201, 888 N.Y.S.2d 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nasworthy-nyappdiv-2009.