People v. Dongo
| Decision Date | 03 November 1997 |
| Citation | 663 N.Y.S.2d 878,244 A.D.2d 353 |
| Parties | , 1997 N.Y. Slip Op. 9233 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Akim DONGO, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Daniel L. Greenberg, New York City (Lawrence T. Hausman, of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens (John M. Castellano and Gerasimia Stathatos, of counsel), for respondent.
Before O'BRIEN, J.P., and THOMPSON, SANTUCCI and McGINITY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Giaccio, J.), rendered February 8, 1996, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
We agree with the defendant's contention, as conceded by the People, that his purported waiver of his right to appeal, made as a condition of his plea of guilty, was ineffective. The court made no inquiry on the record as to whether the defendant understood the implications of the waiver (see, People v. McCaskell, 206 A.D.2d 547, 615 N.Y.S.2d 55). Furthermore, the court wholly failed to explain to the defendant the extent of the appellate rights he would be required to waive (see, People v. Bryant, 225 A.D.2d 786, 640 N.Y.S.2d 157). Inasmuch as the record is insufficient to find the defendant's waiver of his right to appeal to have been knowing, intelligent, and voluntary (see, People v. Callahan, 80 N.Y.2d 273, 590 N.Y.S.2d 46, 604 N.E.2d 108), his present contentions challenging the denial of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence are properly presented for our review (see, People v. Cohen, 210 A.D.2d 343, 620 N.Y.S.2d 92).
Nevertheless, the court correctly denied that branch of the defendant's motion which was to suppress a gun recovered incident to his arrest. The court's determination rested largely upon its assessment of the credibility of the testifying officer and is entitled to great deference (see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 395 N.Y.S.2d 635, 363 N.E.2d 1380). Since the court's conclusion is amply supported by the credible evidence adduced at the suppression hearing, it need not be disturbed (see, People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 353 N.Y.S.2d 500).
The defendant's remaining contentions are...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Bradshaw
...46, 604 N.E.2d 108; People v. Malloy, 8 A.D.3d 679, 779 N.Y.S.2d 250; People v. Folks, 306 A.D.2d 355, 760 N.Y.S.2d 856; People v. Dongo, 244 A.D.2d 353, 663 N.Y.S.2d 878; People v. Gladden, 267 A.D.2d 400, 701 N.Y.S.2d 437; People v. McCaskell, 206 A.D.2d 547, 548, 615 N.Y.S.2d 55). In the......
-
People v. David S.
...533, lv. denied 15 N.Y.3d 809, 908 N.Y.S.2d 169, 934 N.E.2d 903; People v. Gladden, 267 A.D.2d 400, 701 N.Y.S.2d 437; People v. Dongo, 244 A.D.2d 353, 663 N.Y.S.2d 878). Accordingly, the defendant's purported waiver of his rightto appeal does not preclude review of his contention that the S......
-
People v. Shoman
...v. DeSimone, 80 N.Y.2d 273, 283, 590 N.Y.S.2d 46, 604 N.E.2d 108; People v. Gladden, 267 A.D.2d 400, 701 N.Y.S.2d 437; People v. Dongo, 244 A.D.2d 353, 663 N.Y.S.2d 878). However, since the defendant pleaded guilty with the express understanding that if he failed to complete a drug treatmen......
-
People v. Dongo
...570 668 N.Y.S.2d 570 91 N.Y.2d 872, 691 N.E.2d 642 People v. Akim Dongo Court of Appeals of New York Dec 22, 1997 Wesley, J. --- A.D.2d ----, 663 N.Y.S.2d 878 App.Div. 2, Queens Denied. ...