From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jack

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Jan 9, 2019
168 A.D.3d 763 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2016–09479 Ind.No. 9609/11

01-09-2019

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Phillip JACK, Appellant.

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (David L. Goodwin of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Morgan J. Dennehy of counsel; Robert Ho on the memorandum), for respondent.


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (David L. Goodwin of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Morgan J. Dennehy of counsel; Robert Ho on the memorandum), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Frederick Ariaga, J.), imposed July 19, 2016, upon his plea of guilty (Joseph E. Gubbay, J.), on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid and does not preclude review of his excessive sentence claim (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 264, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 255, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ). The Supreme Court's terse colloquy failed to advise the defendant of the nature of the right to appeal, and 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. Hong Mo Lin, 163 A.D.3d 849, 849–850, 79 N.Y.S.3d 656 ; People v. Guarchaj, 122 A.D.3d 878, 879, 996 N.Y.S.2d 372 ). Although the defendant signed a written waiver of his right to appeal, the court did not ascertain on the record whether he had read the waiver or was aware of its contents (see People v. Bratton, 165 A.D.3d 693, 82 N.Y.S.3d 738 ).

However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

RIVERA, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, BRATHWAITE NELSON and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Jack

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Jan 9, 2019
168 A.D.3d 763 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

People v. Jack

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Phillip Jack…

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

Date published: Jan 9, 2019

Citations

168 A.D.3d 763 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
168 A.D.3d 763
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 144