People v. Montgomery

2021 NY Slip Op 00929, 138 N.Y.S.3d 414, 191 A.D.3d 1418
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 11, 2021
Docket94 KA 16-02359
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2021 NY Slip Op 00929 (People v. Montgomery) 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. Montgomery, 2021 NY Slip Op 00929, 138 N.Y.S.3d 414, 191 A.D.3d 1418 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

People v Montgomery (2021 NY Slip Op 00929)
People v Montgomery
2021 NY Slip Op 00929
Decided on February 11, 2021
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 February 11, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, TROUTMAN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

94 KA 16-02359

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

v

LARRY D. MONTGOMERY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.


TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JANET C. SOMES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (SCOTT MYLES OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Judith A. Sinclair, J.), rendered September 27, 2016. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law

§ 140.20). We agree with defendant that the record does not establish that he validly waived his right to appeal. Here, the rights encompassed by defendant's purported waiver of the right to appeal "were mischaracterized during the oral colloquy and in [the] written form[] executed by defendant[], which indicated the waiver was an absolute bar to direct appeal, failed to signal that any issues survived the waiver and . . . advised that the waiver encompassed 'collateral relief on certain nonwaivable issues in both state and federal courts' " (People v Bisono, — NY3d &mdash, &mdash, 2020 NY Slip Op 07484, *2 [2020], quoting People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 566 [2019], cert denied — US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]). We conclude that defendant's purported waiver is not enforceable inasmuch as the totality of the circumstances fails to reveal that defendant "understood the nature of the appellate rights being waived" (Thomas, 34 NY3d at 559; see People v Stenson, 179 AD3d 1449, 1449 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 35 NY3d 974 [2020]). Although we are thus not precluded from reviewing defendant's challenge to the severity of his sentence, we nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Entered: February 11, 2021

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Ortiz
181 N.Y.S.3d 511 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Melendez
167 N.Y.S.3d 860 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Arroyo
167 N.Y.S.3d 896 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Fontanez-Baez
2021 NY Slip Op 03737 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 NY Slip Op 00929, 138 N.Y.S.3d 414, 191 A.D.3d 1418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-montgomery-nyappdiv-2021.