The People of the State of New York v. Javyon J. Ogden
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Criminal procedure—scope and effect of appeal waivers on challenges to removal to Family Court under Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) 722.23 [procedure for removal of adolescent offender cases to Family Court; a motion to prevent removal must be denied unless the court finds extraordinary circumstances], plea voluntariness, youthful offender status, sentence severity, and surcharge waivers.
County Court accepted defendant’s guilty plea, found a valid appeal waiver, granted the People’s motion to prevent removal to Family Court upon finding extraordinary circumstances, denied youthful offender treatment, and imposed sentence and mandatory surcharges.
Nothing. The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment.
The appeal waiver was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent; any defect in the written waiver was cured by an adequate oral colloquy. The plea voluntariness claim was unpreserved and not reviewed in the interest of justice. A valid appeal waiver barred review of the removal ruling under CPL 722.23, youthful offender determination, sentence severity, and request to waive surcharges under CPL 420.35 (2-a) [authorizes waiver of mandatory surcharges and fees in certain cases].
Background
Defendant pleaded guilty to burglary in the first degree (Penal Law (PL) § 140.30 [4] [first-degree burglary]) and assault in the first degree (PL § 120.10 [1] [first-degree assault]). Before the plea, the People moved to prevent removal of the adolescent offender case to Family Court under CPL 722.23 [procedure for removal of adolescent offender cases to Family Court; a motion to prevent removal must be denied unless the court finds extraordinary circumstances], which County Court granted. As part of the plea, defendant executed a written appeal waiver and engaged in an oral appeal-waiver colloquy. He later challenged the validity of the waiver and plea, the denial of removal to Family Court, youthful offender treatment, sentence severity, and the failure to waive surcharges under CPL 420.35 (2-a) [authorizes waiver of mandatory surcharges and fees in certain cases].
Lower Court Decision
Wayne County Court accepted the guilty plea, granted the People’s motion to prevent removal after finding extraordinary circumstances, denied youthful offender status, and imposed sentence and mandatory surcharges and fees.
Appellate Division Reversal
No reversal; the judgment was affirmed. The court held the appeal waiver valid (oral colloquy cured defects in the written waiver; monosyllabic responses did not invalidate it). The voluntariness challenge to the plea was unpreserved and not reviewed under CPL 470.15 (3) (c) [interest of justice review]. A valid appeal waiver foreclosed review of the CPL 722.23 removal determination, youthful offender ruling, sentence severity, and surcharge waiver request. Two judges dissented, arguing the appeal waiver did not encompass the removal issue and that the People failed to show extraordinary circumstances; they would have vacated the plea, denied the People’s motion under CPL 722.23 (1), and remitted for removal to Family Court.
Legal Significance
Confirms in the Fourth Department that a valid appeal waiver can bar appellate review of a Youth Part court’s denial of removal to Family Court under CPL 722.23 and that the issue is not treated as jurisdictional. Reaffirms that a proper oral colloquy can cure defects in a written appeal waiver and that brief affirmative responses do not negate a knowing waiver. Preservation is required to challenge plea voluntariness, absent interest-of-justice review.
In adolescent offender cases, a properly obtained appeal waiver will foreclose appellate challenges to Family Court removal determinations under CPL 722.23 and related sentencing/fee issues; defendants must preserve plea challenges and cannot rely on defective written waivers where an adequate oral colloquy is conducted.