Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. SAMUEL J. SAELI, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (Penal Law former § 175.35). We agree with defendant that his waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence. “[N]o mention was made on the record during the course of the allocution concerning the waiver of defendant's right to appeal his conviction that he was also waiving his right to appeal the harshness of his sentence” (People v. Pimentel, 108 AD3d 861, 862, lv denied 21 NY3d 1076; see People v. Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928; People v. Peterson, 111 AD3d 1412, 1412). Although defendant executed a written waiver of the right to appeal in which he waived “any and all sentencing matters,” we conclude that the written waiver “does not foreclose our review of the severity of the sentence because [Supreme Court] ‘did not inquire of defendant whether he understood the written waiver or whether he had even read the waiver before signing it’ “ (People v. Donaldson, 130 AD3d 1486, 1486–1487, quoting People v. Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 262). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence of 6 months of incarceration and 5 years of probation is not unduly harsh or severe. Defendant has completed serving the term of incarceration, and the period of probation is precisely what defense counsel requested at sentencing. In any event, we conclude that the sentence is appropriate in light of defendant's
criminal history and the favorable nature of the plea bargain.
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: KA 13–01756
Decided: February 05, 2016
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)