People v. Pellew
This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 05939 (People v. Pellew) 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.
Opinion
| People v Pellew |
| 2020 NY Slip Op 05939 |
| Decided on October 21, 2020 |
| 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 October 21, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
JEFFREY A. COHEN
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
2019-06193
(Ind. No. 6443/18)
v
Gavin Pellew, appellant.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Lynn W. L. Fahey of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Amy Appelbaum of counsel; Alastair Allen on the memorandum), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sharen D. Hudson, J.), imposed May 28, 2019, 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 reflect that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 566). The Supreme Court's colloquy and the written waiver "mischaracterized the appellate rights waived as encompassing an absolute bar to the taking of a direct appeal and the loss of attendant rights to counsel and poor person relief" (People v Tayeh, 181 AD3d 726, 727; see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d at 565-566; People v Morocho, 184 AD3d 876). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v Morocho, 184 AD3d 876).
However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
BALKIN, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN, CONNOLLY and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2020 NY Slip Op 05939, 131 N.Y.S.3d 266, 187 A.D.3d 1060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pellew-nyappdiv-2020.