Court Opinion

ID: 9881973
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-04 19:28:35.042258+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:18.525969
License: Public Domain

People v Matthews (2023 NY Slip Op 05007)

People v Matthews

2023 NY Slip Op 05007

Decided on October 4, 2023

Appellate Division, Second 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 October 4, 2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

BETSY BARROS, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
WILLIAM G. FORD
HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.

2022-08118
 (Ind. No. 70449/22)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,
vKeyshawn Matthews, appellant.

Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Russ Altman-Merino of counsel), for appellant.
Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Nancy Fitzpatrick Talcott of counsel; Michael Lazard on the memorandum), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Mary L. Bejarano, J.), imposed September 6, 2022, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
The record does not establish that the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, as the Supreme Court mischaracterized the nature of the right to appeal by stating that the defendant's conviction and sentence would be final (see People v Bisono, 36 NY3d 1013, 1017-1018; People v Boykin, 2023 NY Slip Op 04133 [2d Dept]; People v Saunders, 206 AD3d 826). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim.
Nevertheless, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
BARROS, J.P., CHAMBERS, FORD and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph
Acting Clerk of the Court