From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Murray-Adams

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 11, 2021
195 A.D.3d 1450 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

537 KA 19-02149

06-11-2021

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel MURRAY-ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

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


FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PIOTR BANASIAK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JESSICA N. CARBONE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CURRAN, WINSLOW, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, burglary in the first degree ( Penal Law § 140.30 [2] ), defendant contends that he did not validly waive his right to appeal and that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe. We agree with defendant that he did not validly waive his right to appeal. Supreme Court provided defendant with erroneous information about the scope of the waiver of the right to appeal, including characterizing it as an absolute bar to the taking of an appeal, and we thus conclude that the colloquy was insufficient to ensure that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent ( see People v. Thomas , 34 N.Y.3d 545, 564-567, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 [2019], cert denied ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 2634, 206 L.Ed.2d 512 [2020] ). We note that "[t]he better practice is for the court to use the Model Colloquy, which neatly synthesizes ... the governing principles" ( People v. Somers , 186 A.D.3d 1111, 1112, 127 N.Y.S.3d 399 [4th Dept. 2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 976, 138 N.Y.S.3d 495, 162 N.E.3d 724 [2020] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Thomas , 34 N.Y.3d at 567, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 ; NY Model Colloquies, Waiver of Right to Appeal). Nevertheless, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.


Summaries of

People v. Murray-Adams

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 11, 2021
195 A.D.3d 1450 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

People v. Murray-Adams

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel MURRAY-ADAMS…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 11, 2021

Citations

195 A.D.3d 1450 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
195 A.D.3d 1450

Citing Cases

People v. Jackson

uage in the written waiver form arguably portrays the waiver as an absolute bar to the taking of an appeal…

People v. Jackson

ly portrays the waiver as an absolute bar to the taking of an appeal (see generallyPeople v. Thomas , 34…