Opinion
No. 2022-05628 Ind. No. 389/21
11-01-2023
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Khalil Jennings, appellant.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Anne Jouravleva of counsel), for appellant. Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Danielle M. O'Boyle of counsel; Sarah Coon on the memorandum), for respondent.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Anne Jouravleva of counsel), for appellant.
Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Danielle M. O'Boyle of counsel; Sarah Coon on the memorandum), for respondent.
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P., ANGELA G. IANNACCI, PAUL WOOTEN, LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Ira H. Margulis, J.), imposed July 11, 2022, 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 since the Supreme Court did not discuss the appeal waiver until after the defendant had already admitted his guilt as part of the plea agreement (see People v Blake, 210 A.D.3d 901; People v Diallo, 196 A.D.3d 598). Moreover, the court's colloquy improperly suggested that waiving the right to appeal was mandatory rather than a right which the defendant was being asked to voluntarily relinquish (see People v Posy, 165 A.D.3d 1176). Thus, the defendant's purported waiver of appeal does not foreclose appellate review of his excessive sentence claim.
However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
CONNOLLY, J.P., IANNACCI, WOOTEN and WAN, JJ., concur.