The People, etc., respondent, v. Darryel Ishmael, appellant. (2026)

Submitted—April 30, 2026

DECISION & ORDER

W/

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Ushir Pandit–Durant, J.), rendered November 9, 2021, convicting him of rape in the first degree and criminal sexual act in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.  The appeal brings up for review two orders of protection issued at the time of sentencing.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the People's contention, the record does not establish that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v. Sutton, 184 AD3d 236, 245;  People v. Pressley, 116 AD3d 794, 795).  The record failed to indicate that the People, rather than the Supreme Court, required a waiver of the right to appeal as a condition of the plea agreement (see generally People v. Sutton, 184 AD3d at 244–245).  Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v. Platel, 187 AD3d 1216, 1216;  People v. Fuller, 163 AD3d 715, 715).

Nonetheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's contention regarding the duration of the orders of protection issued at sentencing is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant did not raise the contention at sentencing or move to amend the orders of protection (see People v. Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 316–317;  People v. Sutki S., 185 AD3d 610, 612).  In any event, the defendant's contention that the duration of the orders of protection exceed the maximum time limit of CPL 530.12(5) is without merit (see People v. Williams, 19 NY3d 100, 104–105;  People v. Zhiminaicela–Duchitanga, 214 AD3d 1005, 1005).

DUFFY, J.P., GENOVESI, DOWLING and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court