| People v Chavez |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 07988 [133 AD3d 611] |
| November 4, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Christian Chavez, Appellant. |
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Mark W. Vorkink of counsel), forappellant.
Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove andRhea A. Grob of counsel; Paige Mankin on the memorandum), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the SupremeCourt, Kings County (Walsh, J.), imposed July 31, 2012, upon his plea of guilty, on theground that the sentence was excessive.
Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.
A defendant who has validly waived the right to appeal cannot invoke this Court'sinterest of justice jurisdiction to obtain a reduced sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d248, 255 [2006]). Here, however, this Court is not precluded from exercising itsinterest of justice jurisdiction because the defendant's purported waiver of his right toappeal was invalid. The record does not demonstrate that the defendant understood "thenature of the right to appeal and the consequences of waiving [that right]" (People v Brown, 122 AD3d133, 144 [2014]; see Peoplev Williams, 131 AD3d 627 [2015]; People v Reyes, 121 AD3d 820, 821 [2014]). Although therecord reflects that the defendant signed a written waiver of his right to appeal, thedefendant's understanding of the appeal waiver is not evident on the face of the recordinasmuch as the Supreme Court failed to engage in any "on-the-record discussion withthe defendant regarding the waiver of his . . . right to appeal" (People vBrown, 122 AD3d at 140; see People v Cantarero, 123 AD3d 841 [2014]; People v Quezada, 122 AD3d948, 948 [2014]; People v Reyes, 121 AD3d at 821).
Nevertheless, contrary to the defendant's contention, the periods of postreleasesupervision imposed were not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80[1982]). Eng, P.J., Mastro, Sgroi, Miller and Barros, JJ., concur.