- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
PEOPLE v. IBRAHIM
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law ยง 220.16). Contrary to the contention of defendant, the facts and circumstances surrounding his waiver of the right to appeal establish that it was voluntary, knowing and intelligent ( see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11; People v Jeter, 15 AD3d 885, lv denied 4 NY3d 887). The valid waiver by defendant of his right to appeal encompasses his further contention concerning the severity of the sentence ( see People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [199). Although the contention of defendant that County Court erred in imposing an enhanced sentence based upon his postplea arrest survives his waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v Williams, 35 AD3d 1198, 1199, lv denied 8 NY3d 928), we conclude that defendant's contention lacks merit. Here, the record establishes that the court did not impose an enhanced sentence but in fact imposed the agreed-upon sentence.
Alert