Case ID: ad3d_137/html/1377-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(March 10, 2016)
    The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Webb, Appellant.
    [25 NYS3d 914]
   Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (McKeighan, J.), rendered June 15, 2012, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree in full satisfaction of a four-count indictment and executed a waiver of his right to appeal. Under the terms of his plea agreement, County Court agreed to sentence defendant to a prison term of four years with two years of postrelease supervision provided that he did not have any undisclosed prior felonies. Upon finding thereafter that defendant had a prior felony conviction that had not been considered, the court adjourned sentencing for further review and to allow defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea. Defendant chose not to withdraw his plea and agreed to proceed to sentencing and to be sentenced, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of six years with two years of post-release supervision; the court then imposed the agreed-upon sentence. Defendant appeals.

Initially, we find that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal does not preclude his challenge to the sentence, as his written waiver executed in the course of the plea proceedings expressly recited only the original four-year sentence. Turning to the merits, in light of defendant’s criminal history and the severity of the conduct underlying his conviction, we reject his sole contention on appeal that the sentence imposed by County Court was harsh and excessive (see People v Tetreault, 131 AD3d 1327, 1328 [2015]; People v Rabideau, 130 AD3d 1094, 1095 [2015]; People v Ensley, 53 AD3d 929, 930 [2008]).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Egan Jr. and Rose, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.