People v. Randall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Randall

2017 NY Slip Op 5011, 151 A.D.3d 1867, 54 N.Y.S.3d 353

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 16, 2017

Docket840 KA 14-02283

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 5011 (People v. Randall) 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. Randall, 2017 NY Slip Op 5011, 151 A.D.3d 1867, 54 N.Y.S.3d 353 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Victoria M. Argento, J.), rendered October 2, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the first 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 rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35 [4]). Preliminarily, we note that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal is not valid. The perfunctory inquiry made by County Court during the plea colloquy was not sufficient “to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice” (People v Beaver, 128 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Moreover, although the record includes a signed written waiver of the right to appeal, there was no “attempt by the court to ascertain on the record an acknowledgment from defendant that he had, in fact, signed the waiver or that, if he had, he was aware of its contents” and understood them (People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 283 [1992]; see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 265 [2011]; cf. People v Bryant, 28 NY3d 1094, 1095-1096 [2016]). We nevertheless conclude that defendant’s challenge to the severity of the sentence is without merit.

Present — Smith, J.P., Centra, Peradotto, Lindley and NeMoyer, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Victoria M. Argento, J.), rendered October 2, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the first 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 rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35 [4]). Preliminarily, we note that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal is not valid. The perfunctory inquiry made by County Court during the plea colloquy was not sufficient “to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice” (People v Beaver, 128 AD3d 1493, 1494 [2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Moreover, although the record includes a signed written waiver of the right to appeal, there was no “attempt by the court to ascertain on the record an acknowledgment from defendant that he had, in fact, signed the waiver or that, if he had, he was aware of its contents” and understood them (People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 283 [1992]; see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 265 [2011]; cf. People v Bryant, 28 NY3d 1094, 1095-1096 [2016]). We nevertheless conclude that defendant’s challenge to the severity of the sentence is without merit.

Present — Smith, J.P., Centra, Peradotto, Lindley and NeMoyer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 5011, 151 A.D.3d 1867, 54 N.Y.S.3d 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-randall-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack