People v Curras
2013 NY Slip Op 02589 [105 AD3d 973]
April 17, 2013
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, May 29, 2013


The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Angel Curras, Appellant.

[*1]Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Erica Horwitz of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and MariaPark of counsel; Gregory Musso on the memorandum), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County(DiMango, J.), imposed February 16, 2011, on the ground that the sentence is excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant's purported waiver of the right to appeal is invalid because theSupreme Court, in explaining the right to appeal, "lump[ed]" it with the rightsautomatically surrendered by entry of a plea of guilty (People v Lopez, 6 NY3d248, 257 [2006]). Further, the executed waiver form did not cure the error becauseeven though that form explained that the right to appeal was indeed separate from otherenumerated rights, the court failed to ensure that the defendant had read it and was awareof its contents (see People vElmer, 19 NY3d 501, 510 [2012]; People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 262 [2011]; People v Alston, 101 AD3d1672 1673 [2012]).

However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90AD2d 80 [1982]). Eng, P.J., Angiolillo, Balkin and Hall, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.