People v. Kidwai

People v Kidwai (2026 NY Slip Op 00531) People v Kidwai 2026 NY Slip Op 00531 Decided on February 4, 2026 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 February 4, 2026 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P. LARA J. GENOVESI WILLIAM G. FORD JANICE A. TAYLOR JAMES P. MCCORMACK, JJ. 2024-07501 (Ind. No. 72358/23) [*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent, v Mohammed U. Kidwai, appellant. Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Amanda E. Schaefer of counsel), for appellant. Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Thomas C. Costello of counsel), for respondent. DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (Karen M. Wilutis, J.), imposed July 18, 2024, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive. ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed. Contrary to the People's contention, the record does not demonstrate that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256). The record reflects that the County Court made its own offer of sentence to the defendant and required that the defendant waive his right to appeal, but the court did not set forth any reason for demanding an appeal waiver, and none is apparent on the record (see People v Esposito, 187 AD3d 781; People v Sutton, 184 AD3d 236, 244-245). Accordingly, the purported appeal waiver does not preclude appellate review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v Sutton, 184 AD3d at 244-245). However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). DUFFY, J.P., GENOVESI, FORD, TAYLOR and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur. ENTER: Darrell M. Joseph Clerk of the Court