People v. Berrios
Docket 2022-01990
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 02664
- Docket
- 2022-01990
Appeal from a judgment of conviction upon a guilty plea and sentence, reviewing denial of a suppression motion
Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the defendant Angel Berrios's conviction following his guilty plea to attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court, Kings County. The court rejected Berrios's challenge to the denial of his suppression motion because he had validly waived his right to appeal; that waiver bars appellate review of the suppression ruling. Accordingly, the appellate court affirmed the judgment without reaching the merits of the suppression claim.
Issues Decided
- Whether the defendant's appellate waiver was valid and thus bars review of his suppression claim
- Whether the denial of the defendant's motion to suppress statements and physical evidence may be reviewed on appeal given the waiver
Court's Reasoning
The court found the waiver of appellate rights to be valid under controlling precedent, which prevents appellate review of issues encompassed by that waiver. Because the suppression challenge fell within the scope of the valid waiver, the appellate court concluded it was precluded from considering the merits of the suppression ruling and therefore affirmed the conviction and sentence.
Authorities Cited
- People v Lopez6 NY3d 248
- People v Camacho179 AD3d 831
- People v Cheristin239 AD3d 670
Parties
- Appellant
- Angel Berrios
- Respondent
- The People of the State of New York
- Judge
- John T. Hecht
- Judge
- Mark C. Dillon
- Attorney
- Victoria L. Benton
- Attorney
- Leonard Joblove
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-29
- Judgment date (Supreme Court)
- 2022-03-14
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult criminal defense counsel
Discuss whether any collateral remedies (for example, a CPL 440 motion or federal habeas petition) are available and not foreclosed by the appellate waiver.
- 2
Consider application for leave to appeal
If applicable, consult counsel about seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, keeping in mind such leave is discretionary and waiver may still limit review.
- 3
Confirm sentencing and custody status
Verify with counsel or the court clerk the defendant's current custody, sentencing computation, and any deadlines for post-conviction filings.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction and sentence because the defendant had validly waived his right to appeal, which prevents review of the suppression claim.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The decision affects Angel Berrios, whose conviction and sentence remain in place; it also confirms that valid appellate waivers limit appellate review in similar cases.
- What happens next for the defendant?
- Because the appeal was affirmed, the defendant's conviction and sentence stand unless he pursues other post-conviction remedies not barred by the waiver, such as certain collateral challenges.
- Can this decision be appealed further?
- The decision could possibly be the subject of an application for leave to appeal to a higher court, but appellate waiver issues and the prospects of relief would depend on the higher court's discretion.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
People v Berrios - 2026 NY Slip Op 02664 People v Berrios 2026 NY Slip Op 02664 April 29, 2026 Appellate Division, Second Department The People of the State of New York, respondent, v Angel Berrios, appellant. Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department Decided on April 29, 2026 2022-01990, (Ind. No. 1345/20) Mark C. Dillon, J.P. Colleen D. Duffy Carl J. Landicino Elena Goldberg Velazquez, JJ. Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Victoria L. Benton of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove, Morgan J. Dennehy, Jordan Cerruti, and David Cao of counsel), for respondent. DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (John T. Hecht, J.), rendered March 14, 2022, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contentions regarding the validity of the waiver of his right to appeal are without merit ( see People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248, 256; People v Cheristin , 239 AD3d 670, 670-671, lv granted 44 NY3d 1050). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his challenge to the hearing court's denial of his motion to suppress certain statements he made to law enforcement officials and physical evidence ( see People v Camacho , 179 AD3d 831, 831-832; People v Garcia , 175 AD3d 612, 613). DILLON, J.P., DUFFY, LANDICINO and GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ., concur. ENTER: Darrell M. Joseph