People v. Maynor

161 N.Y.S.3d 912, 203 A.D.3d 1581, 2022 NY Slip Op 01663
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 11, 2022
Docket175 KA 20-01642
StatusPublished

This text of 161 N.Y.S.3d 912 (People v. Maynor) 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. Maynor, 161 N.Y.S.3d 912, 203 A.D.3d 1581, 2022 NY Slip Op 01663 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

People v Maynor (2022 NY Slip Op 01663)
People v Maynor
2022 NY Slip Op 01663
Decided on March 11, 2022
Appellate Division, Fourth 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 March 11, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, NEMOYER, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.

175 KA 20-01642

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

RONALD MAYNOR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.


FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (TYLER BUGDEN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (KAITLYN M. GUPTILL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Stephen J. Dougherty, J.), rendered November 18, 2020. The judgment convicted defendant upon a plea of guilty of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [1]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is invalid and that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. As the People correctly concede, County Court provided defendant with erroneous information about the scope of the waiver of the right to appeal, therefore we conclude that the colloquy was insufficient to ensure that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 564-568 [2019], cert denied — US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]). Contrary to defendant's contention, however, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Entered: March 11, 2022

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

§ 431
New York JUD § 431
§ 120.05
New York PEN § 120.05

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
161 N.Y.S.3d 912, 203 A.D.3d 1581, 2022 NY Slip Op 01663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-maynor-nyappdiv-2022.