People v. Kidwai

2026 NY Slip Op 00531
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 4, 2026
DocketInd. No. 72358/23
StatusPublished

This text of 2026 NY Slip Op 00531 (People v. Kidwai) 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. Kidwai, 2026 NY Slip Op 00531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

People v Kidwai (2026 NY Slip Op 00531)
People v Kidwai
2026 NY Slip Op 00531
Decided on February 4, 2026
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 February 4, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P.
LARA J. GENOVESI
WILLIAM G. FORD
JANICE A. TAYLOR
JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ.

2024-07501
(Ind. No. 72358/23)

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

v

Mohammed U. Kidwai, appellant.


Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Amanda E. Schaefer of counsel), for appellant.

Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Thomas C. Costello of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (Karen M. Wilutis, J.), imposed July 18, 2024, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the People's contention, the record does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256). The record reflects that the County Court made its own offer of sentence to the defendant and required that the defendant waive his right to appeal, but the court did not set forth any reason for demanding an appeal waiver, and none is apparent on the record (see People v Esposito, 187 AD3d 781; People v Sutton, 184 AD3d 236, 244-245). Accordingly, the purported appeal waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v Sutton, 184 AD3d at 244-245).

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

DUFFY, J.P., GENOVESI, FORD, TAYLOR and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Sutton
2020 NY Slip Op 3400 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Esposito
2020 NY Slip Op 05524 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2026 NY Slip Op 00531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kidwai-nyappdiv-2026.