People v. Velez

2020 NY Slip Op 3550, 124 N.Y.S.3d 228, 184 A.D.3d 880
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 24, 2020
DocketInd. No. 16-00812
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 3550 (People v. Velez) 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. Velez, 2020 NY Slip Op 3550, 124 N.Y.S.3d 228, 184 A.D.3d 880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

People v Velez (2020 NY Slip Op 03550)
People v Velez
2020 NY Slip Op 03550
Decided on June 24, 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 June 24, 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.

2017-11146
(Ind. No. 16-00812)

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

v

Raymond Velez, appellant.


Jennifer Spencer, White Plains, NY, for appellant.

Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, NY (Raffaelina Gianfrancesco and William C. Milaccio of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Larry J. Schwartz, J.), rendered August 22, 2017, convicting him of burglary 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 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 McDowell, 181 AD3d 716, citing People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545), and the written waiver form also stated that his conviction and sentence would be final. Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim.

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. Saunders
2022 NY Slip Op 03910 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 3550, 124 N.Y.S.3d 228, 184 A.D.3d 880, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-velez-nyappdiv-2020.