People v. Williams, 36 N.Y.2d 829 (1975)
A defendant may waive the right to appeal a pre-conviction denial of a suppression motion as a condition of accepting a guilty plea, provided the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
Summary
The New York Court of Appeals held that a defendant could waive the right to appeal the denial of a suppression motion as a condition of pleading guilty to manslaughter. Williams was indicted on two counts of murder. Prior to trial, he moved to suppress admissions made to the police. After the suppression motion was denied, he offered to plead guilty to two counts of manslaughter. The prosecution agreed, contingent upon Williams waiving his right to appeal the suppression ruling. The Court of Appeals upheld the waiver, finding that it was made knowingly and voluntarily after thorough consultation with counsel.
Facts
Defendant Williams was indicted on two counts of murder.
Prior to trial, Williams moved to suppress certain admissions he made to the police.
Williams offered to plead guilty to two counts of manslaughter after his suppression motion was denied.
The prosecutor agreed to accept the guilty plea only if Williams waived his right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion, citing witness availability concerns and the expense of preparing for trial.
Williams, represented by two assigned counsel, admitted to discussing the plea and waiver thoroughly with his family, counsel, and others.
The trial court conducted a thorough interrogation of Williams and his counsel regarding the plea and waiver.
Williams unequivocally confessed his factual guilt.
Procedural History
The trial court denied Williams’s suppression motion.
Williams pleaded guilty to manslaughter in exchange for waiving his right to appeal the suppression ruling.
The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction.
Williams appealed to the New York Court of Appeals, arguing that the waiver was invalid under CPL 710.70(2) and that he was coerced.
Issue(s)
Whether a defendant can waive the right to appeal a pre-conviction denial of a motion to suppress as a condition of pleading guilty.
Holding
Yes, because where the plea on condition was voluntarily entered, with full comprehension on defendant’s part of both the plea and the associated condition, this defendant may properly be held to the waiver of his right to appeal from the denial of his suppression motion.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals reasoned that the waiver was valid because it was made knowingly and voluntarily. The court emphasized that Williams was represented by two attorneys, admitted to discussing the waiver thoroughly, and unequivocally confessed his guilt. The court distinguished this case from situations involving coercion or lack of understanding. The court cited People v. Esajerre, 35 N.Y.2d 463, to support the proposition that defendants can waive certain rights as part of a plea bargain. The court also referenced CPL 710.70(3), which states that a defendant who does not make a suppression motion waives the right to a judicial determination on the issue. The Court found that Williams’s plea and associated waiver were each made knowingly and voluntarily. The Court stated that, “[o]n this record there can be no doubt that defendant’s plea and the associated waiver were each made knowingly and voluntarily.” The Court did not address the merits of the suppression motion, as it upheld the validity of the waiver. The decision highlights the importance of a clear and unequivocal waiver of rights during plea negotiations and emphasizes that waivers must be made with full comprehension of the consequences.