Opinion
2017–10160 2017–10162 Ind.Nos. 2937/16, 8721/16
07-24-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Robert FREESE, Appellant.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Sean Nuttall of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jill Oziemblewski of counsel; Anna Arena on the memorandum), for respondent.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Sean Nuttall of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jill Oziemblewski of counsel; Anna Arena on the memorandum), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, SHERI S. ROMAN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ORDERED that the sentences are affirmed.
The record of the plea proceedings does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 264, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ). The Supreme Court's terse colloquy at the plea allocutions failed to sufficiently advise the defendant of the nature of his right to appeal and the consequences of waiving that right (see People v. Farrell, 169 A.D.3d 919, 94 N.Y.S.3d 164 ; People v. Nugent, 109 A.D.3d 625, 970 N.Y.S.2d 634 ). There is no indication in the record that the defendant understood the distinction between the right to appeal and other trial rights that are forfeited incident to a plea of guilty (see People v. Farrell, 169 A.D.3d at 919–920, 94 N.Y.S.3d 164 ; People v. Hong Mo Lin, 163 A.D.3d 849, 850, 79 N.Y.S.3d 656 ).
Since the defendant did not validly waive his right to appeal, this Court is not precluded from considering the merits of his contention that his sentences were excessive. Nevertheless, the sentences imposed were not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, ROMAN, MALTESE and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.