People v. Michael

120 A.D.3d 713, 990 N.Y.S.2d 879, 2014 NY Slip Op 05899, 2014 WL 4085859, 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5839
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 20, 2014·No. 2013-03222·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J.), imposed February 26, 2013, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). The record does not demonstrate that the defendant “grasped the concept of the appeal waiver and the nature of the right he was forgoing” (People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 267 [2011]; see People v Johnson, 113 AD3d 635, 635 [2014]). Therefore, notwithstanding the defendant’s execution of the written waiver form, it can *714 not be said that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to appeal (see People v Pressley, 116 AD3d 794 [2014]). Accordingly, review of the defendant’s excessive sentence claim is not precluded.

Nevertheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Eng, EJ., Dillon, Lott, Sgroi and Maltese, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Michael, 120 A.D.3d 713, 990 N.Y.S.2d 879, 2014 NY Slip Op 05899, 2014 WL 4085859, 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

120 A.D.3d 713 (People v. Michael) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Singleton
129 A.D.3d 748 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Richardson
128 A.D.3d 735 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)