From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Risco

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Oct 3, 2018
165 A.D.3d 703 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

2017–08004 Ind. No. 181/17

10-03-2018

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Dante RISCO, appellant.

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Denise A. Corsi' of counsel), for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Roni C. Piplani of counsel), for respondent.


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Denise A. Corsi' of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Roni C. Piplani of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leslie Leach, J.), imposed June 22, 2017, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant did not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waive his right to appeal (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 264, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ). In a brief colloquy, the Supreme Court, inter alia, specifically informed the defendant that he was not forfeiting his right to challenge "the legality of the sentence," but made no distinction between the legality and the excessiveness of the sentence. Although the written waiver form signed on the defendant's behalf by his counsel stated, in relevant part, that the defendant was waiving "any issue with regard to the imposition of sentence," the record does not disclose whether the defendant ever read, understood, or even discussed the written waiver form with his counsel. Under the circumstances presented, the defendant did not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waive his right to challenge the excessiveness of the sentence.

However, contrary to the defendant's contention, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

BALKIN, J.P., ROMAN, MALTESE and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Risco

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Oct 3, 2018
165 A.D.3d 703 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

People v. Risco

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Dante Risco, appellant.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Oct 3, 2018

Citations

165 A.D.3d 703 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
165 A.D.3d 703
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 6570

Citing Cases

People v. Morris

Moreover, the facts to which the defendant admitted during his plea allocution were sufficient to establish…

People v. Morris

Moreover, the facts to which the defendant admitted during his plea allocution were sufficient to establish…