Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Wayne J. Gause, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2018-01-25
Citations: 157 A.D.3d 1167
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Wayne J. Gause, Appellant.
Judges: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Devine, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 157
Pages: 1167–1168

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Wayne J. Gause, Appellant.
[67 NYS3d 506]

Opinion:
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Murphy, J.), rendered March 2, 2015, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
Defendant waived indictment and agreed to be prosecuted pursuant to a superior court information charging him with one count of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree. A plea agreement was reached, pursuant to the terms of which defendant agreed to plead guilty to the superior court information with the understanding that he would be sentenced to a prison term of four years followed by a period of postrelease supervision ranging from IV2 to 3 years. The plea agreement, which also would satisfy additional charges, required defendant to waive his right to appeal. Defendant thereafter pleaded guilty to the charged crime and was sentenced to a prison term of four years followed by two years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.
Upon appeal, defendant argues only that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive. In light of defendant's unchallenged waiver of the right to appeal, however, we are precluded from reviewing this issue (see People v Fairweather, 147 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1031 [2017]; People v Perkins, 140 AD3d 1401, 1403 [2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1126 [2016]; People v Smalls, 128 AD3d 1281, 1282 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 1006 [2016]). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Devine, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.