People v. Royster
This text of 161 N.Y.S.3d 785 (People v. Royster) 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 Royster |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 01812 |
| Decided on March 16, 2022 |
| 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 March 16, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
SHERI S. ROMAN
JOSEPH A. ZAYAS, JJ.
2020-00592
(Ind. No. 490/19)
v
Ron Royster, Jr., appellant.
Thomas R. Villecco, Jericho, NY, for appellant.
David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Craig Stephen Brown, J.), rendered December 12, 2019, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The record does not establish that the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, as the County Court mischaracterized the nature of the right to appeal by stating that the defendant's conviction and sentence would be final (see People v Shanks, 37 NY3d 244, 252; People v Bisono, 36 NY3d 1013, 1017-1018; People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264), and the written waiver form did not clarify that appellate review remained available for select issues (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 566; People v Brown, 195 AD3d 943). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim.
Nevertheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., CHAMBERS, ROMAN and ZAYAS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Maria T. Fasulo
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
161 N.Y.S.3d 785, 203 A.D.3d 956, 2022 NY Slip Op 01812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-royster-nyappdiv-2022.