Opinion
2016–11830 2016–11832 2016–11833 2016–11834 Ind. Nos. 122/12, 123/12, 309/15, 310/15
04-17-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph D. RAMACCA, Appellant.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Erica Horwitz of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Danielle S. Fenn of counsel; Victoria Randall on the memorandum), for respondent.
Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Erica Horwitz of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Danielle S. Fenn of counsel; Victoria Randall on the memorandum), for respondent.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SHERI S. ROMAN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeals by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from four sentences of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Marcia P. Hirsch, J.), all imposed October 13, 2016, upon his pleas of guilty, on the ground that the sentences were excessive.
ORDERED that the sentences are affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid. The Supreme Court failed to provide an adequate explanation of the right to appeal (see People v. Bradley, 167 A.D.3d 768, 87 N.Y.S.3d 513 ), and there is no indication on the record that the defendant understood the distinction between the right to appeal and the other trial rights forfeited incident to his pleas of guilty (see People v. Latham, 162 A.D.3d 1068, 1069, 80 N.Y.S.3d 128 ). Consequently, the defendant's alleged waiver does not preclude appellate review of his excessive sentence claims.
However, the sentences imposed were 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.