People v. Reynolds

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Reynolds

2017 NY Slip Op 9006, 156 A.D.3d 1422, 65 N.Y.S.3d 847

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 22, 2017

Docket1369 KA 15-00979

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 9006 (People v. Reynolds) 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. Reynolds, 2017 NY Slip Op 9006, 156 A.D.3d 1422, 65 N.Y.S.3d 847 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Alex R. Renzi, J.), rendered March 4, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]). Defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered because Supreme Court did not expressly inform him that a successful appeal of the court’s adverse suppression determination would result in complete dismissal of the indictment. We reject that contention. It is well settled that “ ‘[n]o particular litany is required for an effective waiver of the right to appeal’ ” (People v Fisher, 94 AD3d 1435, 1435 [4th Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 973 [2012]; see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]). We conclude that defendant’s responses during the plea colloquy and waiver colloquy establish that the waiver of the right to appeal was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered (see People v Griner, 50 AD3d 1557, 1558 [4th Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 737 [2008]). We further conclude that defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the court’s suppression ruling (see Kemp, 94 NY2d at 833; People v Graham, 140 AD3d 1686, 1687 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 930 [2016]).

Present—Whalen, P.J., Centra, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Winslow, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Alex R. Renzi, J.), rendered March 4, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]). Defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered because Supreme Court did not expressly inform him that a successful appeal of the court’s adverse suppression determination would result in complete dismissal of the indictment. We reject that contention. It is well settled that “ ‘[n]o particular litany is required for an effective waiver of the right to appeal’ ” (People v Fisher, 94 AD3d 1435, 1435 [4th Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 973 [2012]; see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]). We conclude that defendant’s responses during the plea colloquy and waiver colloquy establish that the waiver of the right to appeal was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered (see People v Griner, 50 AD3d 1557, 1558 [4th Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 737 [2008]). We further conclude that defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the court’s suppression ruling (see Kemp, 94 NY2d at 833; People v Graham, 140 AD3d 1686, 1687 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 930 [2016]).

Present—Whalen, P.J., Centra, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Winslow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 9006, 156 A.D.3d 1422, 65 N.Y.S.3d 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reynolds-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack