Opinion
08-30-2017
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Michael MITCHELL, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, NY (Barry Stendig of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Camille O'Hara Gillespie of counsel; Noquel A. Matos on the memorandum), for respondent.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, NY (Barry Stendig of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Camille O'Hara Gillespie of counsel; Noquel A. Matos on the memorandum), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Williams, J.), imposed March 30, 2015, 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, under the circumstances of this case, the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal does not preclude appellate review of his claim that the sentence imposed was excessive. The plea colloquy fails to establish that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal the severity of his sentence (see People v. Maracle, 19 N.Y.3d 925, 927–928, 950 N.Y.S.2d 498, 973 N.E.2d 1272 ; see also People v. Sanders, 25 N.Y.3d 337, 340, 12 N.Y.S.3d 593, 34 N.E.3d 344 ; 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, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ). However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ). ENG, P.J., DILLON, SGROI, MILLER and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.