Opinion ID: 2141806
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: People v Nicholson

Text: Defendant Nicholson was charged with attempted murder in the second degree as well as five related charges arising out of a 1999 knife fight with a rival gang member. In exchange for a promised prison sentence of eight years, defendant pleaded guilty. As part of his plea colloquy, and following an explanation of the trial rights forfeited by virtue of a guilty plea, the court said to defendant, You also understand you're giving up your right to appeal, that is, to take to a higher court than this one any of the legal issues connected with this case? You understand that? Defendant answered Yes. One month later, prior to sentencing, the court reiterated, [d]efendant is waiving his right to appeal in this matter. Defendant raised no objection to that statement. Both the court and the court clerk noted in the record that defendant waived his right to appeal. Like defendant Billingslea, Nicholson did not execute a written appeal waiver. On his appeal to the Appellate Division, defendant argued that the appeal waiver, as explained to him, was invalid and that, even if the waiver was valid, the Appellate Division maintained its interest-of-justice authority to review what he believed was an excessive sentence. The Appellate Division concluded that the valid waiver of [defendant's] right to appeal encompassed his present claim that his agreed-upon sentence is excessive and forecloses interest of justice review of that claim. In any event, were we to find that review was not precluded, we would perceive no basis for reducing the sentence (15 AD3d 237, 237-238 [1st Dept 2005] [citations omitted]). We agree that the waiver was valid and therefore affirm.