From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ryerson

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 8, 2019
172 A.D.3d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2017-10029 S.C.I. No. 16–312

05-08-2019

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Timothy S. RYERSON, Appellant.

Anthony N. Iannarelli, Jr., New York, NY, for appellant. David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (William C. Ghee of counsel), for respondent.


Anthony N. Iannarelli, Jr., New York, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (William C. Ghee of counsel), for respondent.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, SHERI S. ROMAN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Orange County (Nicholas DeRosa, J.), imposed December 15, 2016, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid, as the record does not demonstrate that the defendant understood the distinction between the right to appeal and the other trial rights that are forfeited incident to a plea of guilty (see People v. Hong Mo Lin, 163 A.D.3d 849, 79 N.Y.S.3d 656 ; People v. Santeramo, 153 A.D.3d 1286, 1286, 61 N.Y.S.3d 295 ). Moreover, the County Court failed to provide the defendant with an adequate explanation of the nature of the right to appeal and the consequences of waiving that right (see People v. Alston, 163 A.D.3d 843, 81 N.Y.S.3d 167 ; People v. Etienne, 152 A.D.3d 790, 59 N.Y.S.3d 427 ). Further, the transcript of the plea proceeding shows that the court did not ascertain on the record whether the defendant had read the written waiver or whether he was even aware of its contents (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; People v. Santeramo, 153 A.D.3d at 1287, 61 N.Y.S.3d 295 ; People v. Cambridge, 145 A.D.3d 795, 795–796, 44 N.Y.S.3d 96 ). Accordingly, the defendant did not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waive his right to appeal, and thus, the waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v. Dixon, 163 A.D.3d 988, 989, 81 N.Y.S.3d 186 ; People v. Brown, 122 A.D.3d 133, 992 N.Y.S.2d 297 ).

Nevertheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ).

DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN, MALTESE and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ryerson

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 8, 2019
172 A.D.3d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

People v. Ryerson

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Timothy S. Ryerson…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: May 8, 2019

Citations

172 A.D.3d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
172 A.D.3d 909
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 3627

Citing Cases

People v. Anglade

Contrary to the People's contention, the record does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly,…