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. DEON ANDERSON, 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 guilty plea, of rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35 [3]). As defendant contends and the People correctly concede, defendant's waiver of the right to appeal is invalid inasmuch as “County Court mischaracterized the nature of the right that defendant was being asked to cede, portraying the waiver as an absolute bar to defendant taking an appeal, and there was no clarification that appellate review remained available for certain issues” (People v Hussein, 192 AD3d 1705, 1706 [4th Dept 2021], lv denied 37 NY3d 965 [2021]; see People v Somers, 186 AD3d 1111, 1112 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 36 NY3d 976 [2020]; see also People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 564-566 [2019], cert denied — US —, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]). Nevertheless, contrary to defendant's further contention, we conclude that his sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
Finally, we note that the certificate of conviction contains clerical errors (see generally People v Thurston, 208 AD3d 1629, 1630 [4th Dept 2022]). The certificate of conviction erroneously states that defendant was sentenced on July 15, 2019 when, in fact, no sentence was imposed on that date. It further erroneously states that defendant was resentenced on November 12, 2021 when, in fact, November 12 was the first date on which the sentence was pronounced. The certificate of conviction must therefore be amended to correct those clerical errors.
Entered: February 10, 2023
Ann Dillon Flynn
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: 999
Decided: February 10, 2023
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
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)