People v Heath

Annotate this Case
People v Heath 2021 NY Slip Op 01577 Decided on March 19, 2021 Appellate Division, Fourth 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 March 19, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
186 KA 19-00658

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

ALEXANDRIA HEATH, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (ERIN A. KULESUS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (MICHAEL J. HILLERY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Kenneth F. Case, J.), rendered February 21, 2019. The judgment convicted defendant upon her plea of guilty of murder in the second degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25 [1]), defendant contends that her waiver of the right to appeal is invalid and that her sentence is unduly harsh and severe. The record establishes that the oral colloquy, together with the written waiver of the right to appeal, was adequate to ensure that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 564 [2019], cert denied — US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]; People v Jenkins, 184 AD3d 1150, 1150 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 1067 [2020]), and that valid waiver forecloses her challenge to the severity of the sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).

Entered: March 19, 2021

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.