Opinion
01-02-2015
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kareem HOWARD, Defendant–Appellant.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Karen Russo–McLaughlin of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Ashley R. Small of Counsel), for Respondent.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Karen Russo–McLaughlin of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.
Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Ashley R. Small of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, VALENTINO, WHALEN AND DeJOSEPH, JJ.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM:Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03[3] ) and criminal sale of a firearm in the second degree (§ 265.12 [2] ). We agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence. During the plea colloquy, Supreme Court advised him that he was waiving his right to appeal from the conviction only and failed to make any reference to the effect that the waiver would have on any challenge to the severity of his sentence (see People v.
Maracle, 19 N.Y.3d 925, 928, 950 N.Y.S.2d 498, 973 N.E.2d 1272 ; People v. Peterson, 111 A.D.3d 1412, 1412, 974 N.Y.S.2d 864 ). Nevertheless, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
As the People correctly concede, the presentence report has not been redacted as the court ordered at sentencing, and therefore it must be redacted to correct the oversight (see generally People v. Abuhamra, 107 A.D.3d 1630, 1631–1632, 968 N.Y.S.2d 294, lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1038, 981 N.Y.S.2d 372 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.