Majority
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Murphy, J.), imposed December 16, 2011, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.
Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.
A defendant who has validly waived the right to appeal cannot invoke this Court’s interest of justice jurisdiction to obtain a reduced sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248 , 255 [2006]). Here, however, this Court is not precluded from exercising its interest of justice jurisdiction because the defendant’s purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid. There is no indication in the record that the defendant understood the distinction between the right to appeal and the other trial rights which are forfeited incident to a plea of guilty (see People v Bennett, 115 AD3d 973 , 973 [2014]; People v Jacob, 94 AD3d 1142 , 1143 [2012]; People v Mayo, 77 AD3d 683 , 683-684 [2010]; People v Olivier, 48 AD3d 486 , 486 [2008]). Furthermore, although the defendant executed a written appeal waiver form, the transcript
Nevertheless, contrary to the defendant’s contention, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
Eng, P.J., Mastro, Hall, Miller and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Lopez 6 NY3d 248 at 255 p. 841, p. 842
- People v. Bennett 115 AD3d 973 at 973 p. 841
- People v. Mayo 77 AD3d 683 at 683-684 p. 841
- People v. Brown 122 AD3d 133 at 140 p. 842
- People v. Bradshaw 18 NY3d 257 at 264-267 p. 842
- People v. Hidalgo 91 NY2d 733 at 735 p. 842
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 842