| People v Quezada |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 08355 [122 AD3d 948] |
| November 26, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Geraldo Quezada, Appellant. |
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (David P. Greenberg of counsel), forappellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano andMerri Turk Lasky of counsel; Michael Onah on the memorandum), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the SupremeCourt, Queens County (Mullings, J.), imposed July 12, 2012, on the ground that thesentence was excessive.
Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of the right to appeal was invalid. "A waiver of theright to appeal is effective only so long as the record demonstrates that it was madeknowingly, intelligently and voluntarily" (People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see People v Bradshaw, 18NY3d 257, 264 [2011]; People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133, 136 [2d Dept 2014]). Here, although the defendant executed a written waiver of his rightto appeal, the defendant's understanding of the appeal waiver is not evident on the face ofthe record due to the deficiency of the Supreme Court's oral colloquy. Accordingly,under the circumstances of this case, including the defendant's lack of prior experiencewith the criminal justice system (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d at 264-265),the defendant's appeal waiver was invalid (see People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133[2014]; People v Angelis,94 AD3d 902 [2012]), and does not preclude review of his excessive sentenceclaim.
However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90AD2d 80 [1982]). Eng, P.J., Skelos, Leventhal, Roman and Duffy, JJ., concur.