People v. Boykin

219 A.D.3d 499, 192 N.Y.S.3d 260, 2023 NY Slip Op 04133
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 2, 2023
DocketInd. No. 354/16
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 219 A.D.3d 499 (People v. Boykin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Boykin, 219 A.D.3d 499, 192 N.Y.S.3d 260, 2023 NY Slip Op 04133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

People v Boykin (2023 NY Slip Op 04133)
People v Boykin
2023 NY Slip Op 04133
Decided on August 2, 2023
Appellate Division, Second 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 August 2, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
LARA J. GENOVESI
WILLIAM G. FORD
LILLIAN WAN, JJ.

2022-05131
(Ind. No. 354/16)

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

v

Wilbert Boykin, appellant.


Alex Smith, Middletown, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Craig Stephen Brown, J.), rendered June 7, 2022, convicting him of conspiracy in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The record does not establish that the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, as the County Court mischaracterized the nature of the right to appeal by stating that the defendant's conviction and sentence would be final (see People v Shanks, 37 NY3d 244, 252; People v Bisono, 36 NY3d 1013, 1017-1018; People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264). In addition, the written waiver form did not clarify that appellate review remained available for select issues (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 566; People v Brown, 195 AD3d 943). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim.

Nevertheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

IANNACCI, J.P., GENOVESI, FORD and WAN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Maria T. Fasulo

Clerk of the Court



Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Elijah C.
2025 NY Slip Op 04917 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Walker
2025 NY Slip Op 00340 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Marte
2024 NY Slip Op 02067 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Edwards
2024 NY Slip Op 00326 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Matthews
220 A.D.3d 719 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
219 A.D.3d 499, 192 N.Y.S.3d 260, 2023 NY Slip Op 04133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-boykin-nyappdiv-2023.