PEOPLE v. HYMAN (2025)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Jerry M. Iannece, J.), imposed June 5, 2023, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the People's contention, the record does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 264–265, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645).  The Supreme Court did not mention the appeal waiver as part of the plea bargain being offered to the defendant before the agreement was reached, and it was not until after the defendant had already admitted his guilt that the court discussed the waiver with the defendant (see People v. Bonfante, ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 06068;  People v. Marcelle, 222 A.D.3d 883, 200 N.Y.S.3d 104;  People v. Sutton, 184 A.D.3d 236, 245, 125 N.Y.S.3d 739).  Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v. Marcelle, 222 A.D.3d at 883, 200 N.Y.S.3d 104).

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

DUFFY, J.P., GENOVESI, FORD, TAYLOR and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.