Opinion
226 KA 17–00863
03-22-2019
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jeremy L. SOUTAR, Defendant–Appellant.
CHARLES A. MARANGOLA, MORAVIA, FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. JON E. BUDELMANN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
CHARLES A. MARANGOLA, MORAVIA, FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
JON E. BUDELMANN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, NEMOYER, AND CURRAN, 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 course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree ( Penal Law § 130.75[1][b] ), defendant challenges the severity of the sentence. Defendant's waiver of the right to appeal is invalid because the perfunctory inquiry made by County Court was "insufficient to establish that the court ‘engage[d] ... defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice’ " ( People v. Brown, 296 A.D.2d 860, 860, 745 N.Y.S.2d 368 [4th Dept. 2002], lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 767, 752 N.Y.S.2d 7, 781 N.E.2d 919 [2002] ; see People v. Hamilton, 49 A.D.3d 1163, 1164, 856 N.Y.S.2d 375 [4th Dept. 2008] ). Nevertheless, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe (see People v. Carter, 147 A.D.3d 1514, 1516, 47 N.Y.S.3d 614 [4th Dept. 2017], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 1030, 62 N.Y.S.3d 298, 84 N.E.3d 970 [2017] ).