Opinion
110964
01-28-2021
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Karen WILLIAMS, Appellant.
Stephen W. Herrick, Public Defender, Albany (Steven M. Sharp of counsel), for appellant. P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Christopher D. Horn of counsel), for respondent.
Stephen W. Herrick, Public Defender, Albany (Steven M. Sharp of counsel), for appellant.
P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Christopher D. Horn of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Carter, J.), rendered January 3, 2018, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of attempted robbery in the first degree.
Defendant pleaded guilty to attempted robbery in the first degree and purportedly waived the right to appeal. County Court thereafter imposed the agreed-upon sentence of five years in prison, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.
Initially, we find that defendant's appeal waiver was invalid. County Court did not inform defendant that the right to appeal was separate and distinct from the rights she was forfeiting by pleading guilty and did not adequately explain the nature of the waiver or ascertain defendant's knowledge of its ramifications (see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 [2006] ; People v. Alexander, 174 A.D.3d 1068, 1068, 104 N.Y.S.3d 765 [2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 949, 110 N.Y.S.3d 625, 134 N.E.3d 624 [2019] ). Although defendant also signed a written appeal waiver, County Court did not ensure that defendant had read the waiver, discussed it with counsel or understood its contents (see People v. Burnell, 183 A.D.3d 931, 932, 123 N.Y.S.3d 728 [2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 1043, 127 N.Y.S.3d 827, 151 N.E.3d 508 [2020] ; People v. Dolder, 175 A.D.3d 753, 754, 103 N.Y.S.3d 867 [2019] ). Given the invalidity of the appeal waiver, defendant's contention that the sentence is harsh and excessive is not foreclosed. Nonetheless, we discern no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the agreed-upon sentence in the interest of justice (see People v. Cook, 171 A.D.3d 1361, 1361–1362, 96 N.Y.S.3d 921 [2019] ; People v. Mitchell, 166 A.D.3d 1233, 1234, 86 N.Y.S.3d 681 [2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 979, 101 N.Y.S.3d 222, 124 N.E.3d 711 [2019] ).
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.