People v Zaffuto

Annotate this Case
People v Zaffuto 2016 NY Slip Op 03207 Decided on April 27, 2016 Appellate Division, Second 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 April 27, 2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
ROBERT J. MILLER
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
2012-10530
(Ind. No. 76/11)

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

v

Francesco Zaffuto, appellant.



Simon & Partners, LLP, New York, NY (Brian D. Waller of counsel), for appellant.

Michael E. McMahon, District Attorney, Staten Island, NY (Morrie I. Kleinbart of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered November 15, 2012, convicting him of criminal sexual act in the first degree and promoting a sexual performance by a child, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. The defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see generally People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666; People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 17; see also People v Riback, 57 AD3d 1209, 1219, revd on other grounds, 13 NY3d 416).

The defendant correctly argues that the purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid. Under the circumstances of this case, including the defendant's inexperience with the criminal justice system, the terse colloquy conducted by the Supreme Court was insufficient to apprise the defendant of the rights that he was waiving (see People v Pressley, 116 AD3d 794, 796; see generally People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133, 144-145).

However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 85-86).

RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, HINDS-RADIX and LASALLE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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.