PEOPLE v. BROWN (2002)

We agree with defendant that the record establishes that his waiver of the right to appeal is invalid because it was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent.   During the plea colloquy, County Court stated, “And you're waiving your right to appeal on this matter,” and defendant responded, “Yes.” That single reference to defendant's right to appeal is 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. Kemp, 255 A.D.2d 397, 397, 681 N.Y.S.2d 41;  see People v. Callahan, 80 N.Y.2d 273, 283, 590 N.Y.S.2d 46, 604 N.E.2d 108;  cf.  People v. Torres, 236 A.D.2d 642, 654 N.Y.S.2d 658, lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 1041, 659 N.Y.S.2d 872, 681 N.E.2d 1319;  People v. Coleman [appeal No. 1], 219 A.D.2d 827, 632 N.Y.S.2d 907).   Contrary to defendant's contention on appeal, however, we conclude that the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.

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

MEMORANDUM: