People v. Burdo

Summary

The Appellate Division, Third Department held that the defendant's appeal waiver was invalid because the record did not establish that he understood the waiver or that it was executed under appropriate circumstances. The court nevertheless affirmed the judgment, concluding that the agreed-upon concurrent 15-year sentences for first-degree burglary and first-degree robbery were not harsh or excessive.

Holdings

1. The appeal waiver was invalid because the record did not show that County Court advised defendant that the right to appeal was separate and distinct from the trial-related rights forfeited by pleading guilty or that defendant fully understood the consequences of the waiver; the written waiver also was not shown to have been signed in open court after consultation with counsel. Therefore, the waiver did not preclude defendant from challenging the severity of his sentence.
2. The sentence was not harsh or excessive, and no extraordinary circumstances or abuse of discretion warranted reducing it in the interest of justice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was valid and barred appellate review of the severity of his sentence.
2. Whether the agreed-upon sentence was harsh or excessive and warranted reduction in the interest of justice.

Disposition

affirmed