Calendar Date: April 30, 2018Before: McCarthy, J.P., Lynch, Devine, Clark and Pritzker, JJ.__________Theodore J. Stein, Woodstock, for appellant.D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (JoanGudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.__________McCarthy, J.P.Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County(Williams, J.), rendered December 22, 2015, convicting defendantupon his plea of guilty of the crime of sexual abuse in the firstdegree.Defendant was charged in two felony complaints and acriminal information with the crimes of criminal sexual act inthe first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree (three counts)and endangering the welfare of a child (three counts). He waivedindictment on these charges and agreed to be prosecuted by asuperior court information charging him with one count of sexualabuse in the first degree. Defendant pleaded guilty to thiscrime in satisfaction of the above charges, as well as pendingcharges for burglary and grand larceny, and waived his right toappeal. County Court thereafter imposed the agreed-upon sentenceof seven years in prison, to be followed by 10 years ofpostrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.Initially, to the extent that defendant challenges thevalidity of his waiver of the right to appeal, the plea colloquyand the counseled written waiver executed in open courtdemonstrate that the waiver was knowing, intelligent andvoluntary (see People v Crispell, 136 AD3d 1121, 1122 [2016], lvdenied 27 NY3d 1149 [2016]; People v Donah, 127 AD3d 1413, 1413[2015]). The valid appeal waiver precludes defendant’scontention that his sentence is harsh and excessive (see People vBigwarfe, 155 AD3d 1450, 1450 [2017]; People v Wright, 154 AD3d1015, 1016 [2017], lv denied 30 NY3d 1065 [2017]).With regard to defendant’s claim that counsel’s failure tomove to dismiss the superior court information on statutoryspeedy trial grounds deprived him of the effective assistance ofcounsel, thereby rendering his plea involuntary, the record isinadequate to assess the merits of such claim and, therefore, itis more appropriately raised in a CPL article 440 motion (seePeople v Simpson, 146 AD3d 1175, 1176 [2017], lvs denied 30 NY3d980, 983 [2017]; People v Viele, 130 AD3d 1097, 1097 [2015]).His further claim that counsel’s motion practice and discoveryefforts — including counsel’s failure to challenge the factualsufficiency of the felony complaint charging him with criminalsexual act in the first degree — constituted ineffectiveassistance of counsel was forfeited by his guilty plea (seePeople v Hansen, 95 NY2d 227, 230 [2000]; People v Jenkins, 130AD3d 1091, 1092 [2015]; People v Trombley, 91 AD3d 1197, 1201[2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 914 [2013]).Lynch, Devine, Clark and Pritzker, JJ., concur.ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.ENTER:Robert D. MaybergerClerk of the Court
