People v. Thompson

• Decision Date: 23 October 2013
• Citation: 110 A.D.3d 1014,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 06884,973 N.Y.S.2d 575
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Benjamin E. THOMPSON, appellant.

110 A.D.3d 1014

973 N.Y.S.2d 575

2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 06884

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Benjamin E. THOMPSON, appellant.

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

Oct. 23, 2013.

Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y., for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Edward A. Bannan of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hinrichs, J.), rendered October 1, 2010, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant correctly contends that he did not validly waive his right to appeal. 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. Springer, 104 A.D.3d 794, 960 N.Y.S.2d 501;cf. People v. Ramos, 7 N.Y.3d 737, 738, 819 N.Y.S.2d 853, 853 N.E.2d 222).

Nevertheless, the defendant's contentions with respect to an alleged cooperation agreement involve matter that is *576dehors the record and, thus, are not reviewable on direct appeal ( see People v. Smith, 82 A.D.3d 911, 918 N.Y.S.2d 348;see also Matter of Benjamin S., 55 N.Y.2d 116, 120–121, 447 N.Y.S.2d 905, 432 N.E.2d 777).

MASTRO, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, LEVENTHAL and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.