People v. Watson

2019 NY Slip Op 5944
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Watson. Read the opinion of the Court — 150 A.D.3d 1384
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 31, 2019·No. 749 KA 17-01857·Published

Opinion

People v Watson (2019 NY Slip Op 05944)
People v Watson
2019 NY Slip Op 05944
Decided on July 31, 2019
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 July 31, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, NEMOYER, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

749 KA 17-01857

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

ERIC M. WATSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.


THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (SUSAN C. MINISTERO OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

LAWRENCE FRIEDMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BATAVIA (SHIRLEY A. GORMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Michael F. Pietruszka, A.J.), rendered September 26, 2016. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sexual act in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal sexual act in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.45 [2]) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (§ 265.01 [1]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is not valid. We reject that contention. County Court advised defendant of the maximum sentence that could be imposed (see People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]), and the record, which includes an oral and written waiver of the right to appeal, establishes that defendant understood that he was waiving his right to appeal both the conviction and the sentence. We thus conclude that the waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]), and that valid waiver encompasses defendant's contention concerning the severity of the sentence (see id. at 255; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).

Entered: July 31, 2019

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court



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

People v. Watson, 2019 NY Slip Op 5944 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

2019 NY Slip Op 5944 (People v. Watson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Lococo
699 N.E.2d 416 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
People v. Hidalgo
698 N.E.2d 46 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)