

People v Edwards (2017 NY Slip Op 05384)





People v Edwards


2017 NY Slip Op 05384


Decided on June 30, 2017


Appellate Division, Fourth Department


Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.


This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.



Decided on June 30, 2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND SCUDDER, JJ.


920 KA 16-00889

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
vDENNIS EDWARDS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 


FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PIOTR BANASIAK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 
WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

	Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Joseph E. Fahey, J.), rendered January 28, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of kidnapping in the second degree. 
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of kidnapping in the second degree (Penal Law § 135.20). We agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal is invalid because "the minimal inquiry made by County Court was insufficient to establish that the court engage[d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice" (People v Hassett, 119 AD3d 1443, 1443-1444, lv denied 24 NY3d 961 [internal quotation marks omitted]). In addition, "there is no basis upon which to conclude that the court ensured  that the defendant understood that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty' " (People v Jones, 107 AD3d 1589, 1590, lv denied 21 NY3d 1075, quoting People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
Entered: June 30, 2017
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court


