| People v Argilagos |
| 2016 NY Slip Op 01338 [136 AD3d 1050] |
| February 24, 2016 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Patricia K. Argilagos, Appellant. |
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, NY (Arthur H. Hopkirk of counsel), forappellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (William H. Branigan ofcounsel; Lotus Cannon on the memorandum), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by her motion, from a sentence of the SupremeCourt, Queens County (Kron, J.), imposed May 24, 2013, upon her plea of guilty, on theground that the sentence was excessive.
Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of her right to appeal was invalid (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d248, 256 [2006]; People vChavez, 133 AD3d 611 [2015]; People v Quezada, 122 AD3d 948 [2014]; People v Brown, 122 AD3d133 [2014]). The record does not demonstrate that she understood " 'thenature of the right to appeal and the consequences of waiving it' " (People v Cantarero, 123 AD3d841, 842 [2014], quoting People v Brown, 122 AD3d at 140; see People v Quezada, 122AD3d 948 [2014]). Therefore, notwithstanding the defendant's execution of thewritten waiver form, it cannot be said that she knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligentlywaived her right to appeal (see People v Brown, 122 AD3d at 145-146).
Nevertheless, contrary to the defendant's contention, the sentence imposed was notexcessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Eng, P.J., Dillon, Sgroi,Hinds-Radix and Barros, JJ., concur.