People v Suzana

Annotate this Case
People v Suzana 2017 NY Slip Op 01516 Decided on February 28, 2017 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 28, 2017
Andrias, J.P., Feinman, Gische, Gesmer, JJ.
1268/13 3255 2945/13 3254

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Emmanuel Suzana, Defendant-Appellant.



Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Ronald Alfano of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Frank Glaser of counsel), for respondent.



Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael J. Obus, J.), rendered December 12, 2013, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree and criminal mischief in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of six months, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal (see People v Bryant, 28 NY3d 1094 [2016]). The court did not conflate the right to appeal with the rights automatically forfeited by pleading guilty. Instead, it separately explained to defendant that as part of his plea bargain, he was agreeing to waive his right to appeal. Defendant confirmed that he understood, and the oral colloquy was supplemented by a written waiver that was explained to defendant by his counsel with the aid of an interpreter.

Regardless of whether defendant validly waived his right to appeal, his argument regarding the court's summary denial of a portion of his suppression motion is unpreserved and unavailing (see People v Bayron, 119 AD3d 444 [1st Dept 2014], lv denied 25

NY3d 987 [2015]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 28, 2017

CLERK



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.