People v. Wright
Citation | 199 A.D.3d 1025,154 N.Y.S.3d 814 (Mem) |
Decision Date | 24 November 2021 |
Docket Number | S.C.I. No. 230/19,2021–00009 |
Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Justin L. WRIGHT, appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
199 A.D.3d 1025
154 N.Y.S.3d 814 (Mem)
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Justin L. WRIGHT, appellant.
2021–00009
S.C.I. No. 230/19
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted—October 27, 2021
November 24, 2021
Carol Kahn, New York, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Peter M. Forman, J.), rendered December 22, 2020, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and sentencing him to consecutive determinate terms of five years of imprisonment to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision, on the conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and five years of imprisonment to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision, on the conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the law, on the facts, and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the period of postrelease supervision imposed on the conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree from three years to two years; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid because the County Court's oral colloquy mischaracterized the appellate rights waived as encompassing a bar to filing an appellate brief and the loss of attendant rights to counsel and poor person relief (see People v. Kaye, 190 A.D.3d 767, 767–768, 135 N.Y.S.3d 854 ; People v. Sealey, 187 A.D.3d 1067, 1067, 131 N.Y.S.3d 179 ; People v. Walder, 186 A.D.3d 1272, 1272, 127 N.Y.S.3d 894 ; see also People v. Howard, 183 A.D.3d 640, 640, 121 N.Y.S.3d 622 ; People v. McDowell, 181 A.D.3d 716, 716, 117 N.Y.S.3d 854 ; People v. Baptiste, 181 A.D.3d 696, 696, 117...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Baez
...is a stranger, where the relationship was established for the purpose of victimization, or where there is a professional relationship.154 N.Y.S.3d 814 The defendant's remaining contention is without merit. AUSTIN, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ.,...
-
People v. McGowan
...by reducing the period of postrelease supervision imposed on that conviction to the extent indicated herein (see People v. Wright, 199 A.D.3d 1025, 154 N.Y.S.3d 814 ; People v. Brown, 192 A.D.3d 1134, 141 N.Y.S.3d 364 ).The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate......