

People v Romero-Flores (2015 NY Slip Op 04518)





People v Flores


2015 NY Slip Op 04518


Decided on May 27, 2015


Appellate Division, Second 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 May 27, 2015
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

RANDALL T. ENG, P.J.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
L. PRISCILLA HALL
ROBERT J. MILLER
HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.


2012-10754
 (Ind. No. 2207/11)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent, 
vRicardo A. Romero- Flores, appellant.


Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Marcia R. Kucera of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (Cohen, J.), imposed November 26, 2012, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
The record of the plea proceeding demonstrates that the defendant received "[an] explanation of the nature of the right to appeal and the consequences of waiving that right" (People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133, 144; see People v McRae, 123 AD3d 848, 848-849). On the record presented, we conclude that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see generally People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264-267; People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 735). Accordingly, the defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his contention that the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Hardy, 120 AD3d 1358, 1358; People v Arteev, 120 AD3d 1255, 1255; People v Alexander, 104 AD3d 862, 862).
ENG, P.J., MASTRO, HALL, MILLER and LASALLE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court


