Opinion
No. 2021-09449 Ind. No. 1551/19
06-28-2023
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Daniel W. Clark, appellant.
Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Amanda E. Schaefer of counsel), for appellant. Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Meaghan Powers of counsel), for respondent.
Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Amanda E. Schaefer of counsel), for appellant.
Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Meaghan Powers of counsel), for respondent.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P. LINDA CHRISTOPHER PAUL WOOTEN HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Chris Ann Kelley, J.), imposed August 6, 2021, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
Contrary to the People's contention, the record does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256). The record reflects that the Supreme Court made its own offer of sentence to the defendant and required that the defendant waive his right to appeal, but did not set forth any reason for demanding an appeal waiver, and none is apparent on the record (see People v Sutton, 184 A.D.3d 236, 244-245). Accordingly, the purported waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see id. at 244-245).
However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
DUFFY, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, WOOTEN and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.