People v Rodriguez

Annotate this Case
People v Rodriguez 2016 NY Slip Op 07682 Decided on November 16, 2016 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 16, 2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SANDRA L. SGROI
JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
2014-10602
(Ind. No. 1439-14)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Edwin Rodriguez, appellant.



Laurette Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Felice B. Milani of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Michael J. Brennan of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Ambro, J.), rendered October 16, 2014, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant validly waived his right to appeal (see People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 254). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel except to the extent that the alleged ineffective assistance affected the voluntariness of his plea (see People v Moore, 140 AD3d 1091; People v Upson, 134 AD3d 1058). To the extent that the defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim survives his valid waiver of the right to appeal, the claim is without merit (see People v Moore, 140 AD3d at 1092).

The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his contention that the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337; People v Vinzant, 142 AD3d 720).

CHAMBERS, J.P., AUSTIN, SGROI and COHEN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

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.