Sarah S. Holt, Conflict Defender, Rochester (Fabienne N. Santacroce of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Grazina Harper of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Richard M. Healy, A.J.), rendered March 24, 2023. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree.

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 manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Cunningham, 213 AD3d 1270, 1270 [4th Dept 2023], lv denied 39 NY3d 1110 [2023]; see generally People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 559-564 [2019], cert denied 589 US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]). We reject defendant's contention that the waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because "some of defendant's responses to the court's inquiries were monosyllabic" (People v Brown, 41 AD3d 1234, 1234 [4th Dept 2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 873 [2007] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Hoose, 236 AD3d 1294, 1295 [4th Dept 2025]). "No 'particular litany' is required for a waiver of the right to appeal to be valid" (People v Wood, 217 AD3d 1407, 1408 [4th Dept 2023], lv denied 40 NY3d 1000 [2023], quoting People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see also People v Parker, 151 AD3d 1876, 1876 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 30 NY3d 982 [2017]).

Defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes our review of his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256; People v Foumakoye, 229 AD3d 1380, 1380 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 970 [2024]). Present—Whalen, P.J., Montour, Greenwood, Nowak and Hannah, JJ.