Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Sakai Scott, Also Known as Blue, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-05-19
Citations: 139 A.D.3d 1266
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sakai Scott, Also Known as Blue, Appellant.
Judges: Lahtinen, J.R, McCarthy, Devine and Clark, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 139
Pages: 1266–1266

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sakai Scott, Also Known as Blue, Appellant.
[30 NYS3d 586]

Opinion:
Mulvey, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Breslin, J.), rendered December 10, 2012 in Albany County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
In satisfaction of various drug-related charges against him, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and waived his right to appeal. Supreme Court thereafter sentenced defendant, in accordance with the negotiated plea agreement, to six years in prison to be followed by one year of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.
We affirm. Contrary to defendant's contention, based upon our review of the plea colloquy and in consideration of his counseled written waiver of appeal, defendant was adequately informed that the right to appeal was separate and distinct from the rights automatically forfeited by his guilty plea such that he knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see People v O'Keefe, 133 AD3d 1034, 1034-1035 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 1148 [2016]; People v Oginski, 123 AD3d 1303, 1303 [2014], lv denied 26 NY3d 970 [2015]). Further, given defendant's valid appeal waiver, he is precluded from challenging his sentence as harsh and excessive (see People v Griffin, 134 AD3d 1228, 1231 [2015]; People v Donah, 127 AD3d 1413, 1413 [2015]).
Lahtinen, J.R, McCarthy, Devine and Clark, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.