| People v Nelson |
| 2021 NY Slip Op 00928 |
| Decided on February 11, 2021 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on February 11, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, NEMOYER, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
73 KA 15-01060
v
ANDREW J. NELSON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
BETH A. RATCHFORD, CANANDAIGUA, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (LISA GRAY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Christopher S. Ciaccio, J.), rendered January 21, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant upon a plea of guilty of robbery in the first degree (four counts), robbery in the second degree (four counts), assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree (four counts), attempted robbery in the first degree, attempted robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, four counts of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [3]), defendant contends that he did not validly waive his right to appeal and that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe. We agree with defendant that he did not validly waive his right to appeal. As the People correctly concede, County Court provided defendant with erroneous information about the scope of the waiver of the right to appeal, including characterizing it as an absolute bar to the taking of an appeal, and we thus conclude that the colloquy was insufficient to ensure that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 564-568 [2019], cert denied — US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]). We note that "[t]he better practice is for the court to use the Model Colloquy, which neatly synthesizes . . . the governing principles" (People v Somers, 186 AD3d 1111, 1112 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied — NY3d — [2020] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Thomas, 34 NY3d at 567; NY Model Colloquies, Waiver of Right to Appeal). Nevertheless, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
Entered: February 11, 2021
Mark W. Bennett
Clerk of the Court