People v. Tandle
Opinion
| People v Tandle |
| 2025 NY Slip Op 02690 |
| Decided on May 2, 2025 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth 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 May 2, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: LINDLEY, J.P., MONTOUR, OGDEN, GREENWOOD, AND KEANE, JJ.
302 KA 24-00312
v
VICTORIA TANDLE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
ANDREW D. CORREIA, PUBLIC DEFENDER, LYONS (JAMES ECKERT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (DANIEL HUGHES OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Wayne County Court (Richard M. Healy, J.), rendered January 10, 2024. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, upon a guilty plea, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]).
Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes that she knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived her right to appeal (see People v Williams, 228 AD3d 1316, 1316 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 972 [2024], reconsideration denied 42 NY3d 1055 [2024]; see generally People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 559-564 [2019], cert denied — US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). County Court's oral colloquy did not, as asserted by defendant, mischaracterize the waiver of the right to appeal as "an absolute bar to the taking of a first-tier direct appeal" (Thomas, 34 NY3d at 558; see People v Figueroa, 230 AD3d 1581, 1582 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 1079 [2025]). To the extent that defendant contends that the written waiver form she executed was defective, the oral colloquy, which followed the appropriate model colloquy, "cured that [alleged] defect" (People v Hoose, — AD3d &mdash, 2025 NY Slip Op 01436, *1 [4th Dept 2025] [internal quotation marks omitted]).
Defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes our review of her challenge to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6
NY3d at 255-256; People v Foumakoye, 229 AD3d 1380, 1380 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 970 [2024]).
Entered: May 2, 2025
Ann Dillon Flynn
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2025 NY Slip Op 02690 (People v. Tandle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.