Crimes - Plea of Guilty - Withdrawal of Plea

Crimes - Appeal - Valid Waiver of Right to Appeal

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Dutchess County (Jessica Segal, J.), both rendered December 4, 2023, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree under Superior Court information No. 125/21, and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) under indictment No. 37/23, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant's challenge to the validity of his plea of guilty under indictment No. 37/23 is unpreserved for appellate review because the defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or otherwise object to its entry prior to the County Court imposing sentence (see People v Peque, 22 NY3d 168, 182 [2013]). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently (see People v Sougou, 26 NY3d 1052, 1054 [2015]).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record demonstrates that he validly waived his right to appeal under indictment No. 37/23 (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v McCorkle, 230 AD3d 1337 [2024]). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention that the sentence imposed under that indictment was excessive (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256; People v McCorkle, 230 AD3d at 1337).

The sentence imposed under Superior Court information No. 125/21 was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Dillon, J.P., Brathwaite Nelson, Landicino and Quirk, JJ., concur.