People v. Springer
| Decision Date | 14 August 2013 |
| Citation | 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 05647,970 N.Y.S.2d 462,109 A.D.3d 557 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Christopher SPRINGER, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Motion by the appellant (a) for leave to reargue an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered April 20, 2011, which was determined by decision and order of this Court dated March 13, 2013, and (b) to withdraw his argument relating to the duration of the order of protection.
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to reargue is granted and, upon reargument, the decision and order of this Court dated March 13, 2013 ( People v. Springer, 104 A.D.3d 794, 960 N.Y.S.2d 501), is recalled and vacated, and the following decision and order is substituted therefor:
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (David P. Greenberg of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Linda Breen of counsel; David Xu on the memorandum), for respondent.
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chun, J.), rendered April 20, 2011, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review an order of protection issued at the time of sentencing.
ORDERED that the judgment 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 N.Y.3d 248, 255, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145). Here, however, the Court is not precluded from exercising its interest of justice jurisdiction because the defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid. The record does not demonstrate that the defendant “grasped the concept of the appeal waiver and the nature of the right he was forgoing” ( People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645;see People v. Grant, 83 A.D.3d 862, 862–863, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285;cf. People v. Ramos, 7 N.Y.3d 737, 738, 819 N.Y.S.2d 853, 853 N.E.2d 222). Therefore, “notwithstanding the written appeal waiver form, it cannot be said that defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal” ( People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d at 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Harris
...nature of the right he was forgoing” (People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; see People v. Springer, 109 A.D.3d 557, 970 N.Y.S.2d 462 ; People v. Johnson, 109 A.D.3d 489, 970 N.Y.S.2d 91 ; People v. Collins, 104 A.D.3d 785, 960 N.Y.S.2d 328 ). Notwithstan......
-
People v. Sanchez
...Surdis, 160 A.D.3d 1305, 1307, 75 N.Y.S.3d 356 ; People v. Gonyeau, 144 A.D.3d 1574, 1574–1575, 40 N.Y.S.3d 318 ; People v. Springer, 109 A.D.3d 557, 558, 970 N.Y.S.2d 462 ). The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit. DILLON, J.P., DUFFY, BRATHWAITE NELSON and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., ...
-
People v. Johnson
...nature of the right he was forgoing” (People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645; see People v. Springer, 109 A.D.3d 557, 557, 970 N.Y.S.2d 462 [internal quotation marks omitted]; People v. Grant, 83 A.D.3d 862, 862–863, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285). Therefore, “notwithst......
-
People v. Fowler
...the nature of the right he was forgoing” (People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645; People v. Springer, 109 A.D.3d 557, 557, 970 N.Y.S.2d 462 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Grant, 83 A.D.3d 862, 862–863, 921 N.Y.S.2d 285). Therefore, “notwi......