Court Opinion

ID: 4277785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-05-23 19:41:33.348145+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:26:02.430293
License: Public Domain

People v Desir (2018 NY Slip Op 03700)

People v Desir

2018 NY Slip Op 03700

Decided on May 23, 2018

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 May 23, 2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
SHERI S. ROMAN
HECTOR D. LASALLE
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

2016-03390
 (Ind. No. 5176/13)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,
vJosue Desir, appellant.

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Sean H. Murray of counsel), for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Victor Barall of counsel; Masha Simonova on the memorandum), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Matthew J. D'Emic, J.), imposed February 24, 2016, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the period of postrelease supervision imposed was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 267; People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133, 137; People v Johnson, 109 AD3d 1004) and, thus, does not preclude review of this excessive sentence claim. However, the period of postrelease supervision imposed as part of the sentence was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, ROMAN, LASALLE and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court