Opinion
2016–00273 Ind. No. 359/14
04-17-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Ahmed JONES, Appellant.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (William Kastin of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jean M. Joyce of counsel; Ruby D. Andrade on the memorandum), for respondent.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (William Kastin of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jean M. Joyce of counsel; Ruby D. Andrade on the memorandum), for respondent.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SHERI S. ROMAN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDERAppeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Neil J. Firetog, J.), imposed December 15, 2015, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
The record of the plea proceeding does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ). The Supreme Court did not ascertain on the record that the defendant understood the right to appeal and was voluntarily waiving that right (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d at 265–267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ). Although the court explained the right to appeal and asked the defendant if he was willing to waive that right, the record does not contain any response from the defendant. It was not sufficient for the court to rely on the defense counsel's confirmation that he believed that the defendant validly waived his right to appeal (see People v. Brown, 122 A.D.3d 133, 141, 992 N.Y.S.2d 297 ). Moreover, although the record reflects that the defendant executed a written appeal waiver form, the court did not ascertain whether the defendant had read the written waiver or was aware of its contents (see id. at 145–146, 992 N.Y.S.2d 297 ). Therefore, the purported appeal waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's contention that the sentence was excessive.
Nevertheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
BALKIN, J.P., CHAMBERS, ROMAN, MALTESE and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.