People v. Resnick

• Decision Date: 07 March 2018
• Docket Number: Ind. No. 922/14,2016–11558
• Citation: 159 A.D.3d 724,69 N.Y.S.3d 510 (Mem)
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Michael RESNICK, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

159 A.D.3d 724

69 N.Y.S.3d 510 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Michael RESNICK, appellant.

2016–11558

Ind. No. 922/14

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

March 7, 2018

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Mark W. Vorkink of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Johnnette Traill, and Merri Turk Lasky of counsel; Lorrie A. Zinno on the memorandum), for respondent.

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., RUTH C. BALKIN, L. PRISCILLA HALL, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Ronald Hollie, J.), imposed September 30, 2016, as amended October 4, 2016, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence, as amended, is affirmed.

When the Supreme Court explained the defendant's waiver of his right to appeal to him, it improperly conflated the right to appeal with the rights automatically forfeited by a plea of guilty. Accordingly, the waiver of the right to appeal was invalid and, therefore, unenforceable (see People v. Wells, 135 A.D.3d 976, 976, 22 N.Y.S.3d 913 ). The sentence, however, was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

SCHEINKMAN, P.J., BALKIN, HALL, DUFFY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.