People v. Underwood

2020 NY Slip Op 06155, 187 A.D.3d 1221, 131 N.Y.S.3d 219
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 28, 2020
DocketInd. No. 18-00451
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 06155 (People v. Underwood) 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. Underwood, 2020 NY Slip Op 06155, 187 A.D.3d 1221, 131 N.Y.S.3d 219 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

People v Underwood (2020 NY Slip Op 06155)
People v Underwood
2020 NY Slip Op 06155
Decided on October 28, 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 28, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SHERI S. ROMAN
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

2019-03279
(Ind. No. 18-00451)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Elijah Underwood, appellant.


Walter J. Storey, Goshen, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Andrew R. Kass of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Orange County (Craig Stephen Brown, J.), imposed March 14, 2019, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

The record does not establish that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257). The County Court mischaracterized the nature of the right to appeal by stating that the defendant's sentence and conviction would be final (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545), and the written waiver form did not overcome the deficiencies in the court's explanation of the right to appeal, as it did not contain clarifying language that appellate review remained available for select issues (see id.). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v Fuller, 163 AD3d 715).

However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN, HINDS-RADIX and CHRISTOPHER, 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

People v. Burbridge
2021 NY Slip Op 03045 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Rose
2021 NY Slip Op 02318 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 06155, 187 A.D.3d 1221, 131 N.Y.S.3d 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-underwood-nyappdiv-2020.