People v. Holloway
Docket 2023-10534
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 02671
- Docket
- 2023-10534
Appeal from a sentence imposed after a guilty plea in Supreme Court, Kings County, limited by defendant's motion to challenge excessiveness of sentence.
Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the sentence imposed on Tyshaun Holloway after his guilty plea. Holloway challenged the sentence as excessive, but the court held that he had knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal, and that valid waiver bars appellate review of his excessiveness claim. Because the waiver was valid, the court declined to consider the merits of the sentencing claim and affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the Supreme Court, Kings County.
Issues Decided
- Whether the defendant validly waived his right to appeal.
- Whether a valid waiver of appellate rights precludes review of a claim that the sentence was excessive.
Court's Reasoning
The court found the record showed the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal. Under controlling New York precedent, a valid appellate waiver bars appellate review of a sentence-excessive claim. Because the waiver was valid, the court did not reach the merits of the excessiveness challenge and affirmed the sentence.
Authorities Cited
- People v Thomas34 NY3d 545
- People v Lopez6 NY3d 248
Parties
- Appellant
- Tyshaun Holloway
- Respondent
- The People of the State of New York
- Judge
- Jane C. Tully
- Judge
- Betsy Barros
- Judge
- Valerie Brathwaite Nelson
- Judge
- Barry E. Warhit
- Judge
- Lourdes M. Ventura
- Judge
- Susan Quirk
- Attorney
- Rebecca D. Martin
- Attorney
- Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-29
- Sentence imposed
- 2023-10-27
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult defense counsel about post-conviction options
Talk with your attorney about whether collateral remedies (such as a motion to vacate the plea or a habeas petition) are available given the waiver and the facts of your case.
- 2
Consider filing a motion alleging ineffective assistance
If counsel believes there was ineffective assistance that affected the plea or the waiver, prepare a timely collateral motion outlining specific facts and supporting evidence.
- 3
Comply with sentence and prison rules
Until and unless successful relief is obtained, follow the terms of the sentence and institutional regulations to avoid disciplinary issues that could affect future relief.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court affirmed the sentence because the defendant had validly waived his right to appeal, so the appellate court would not review his claim that the sentence was excessive.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The decision affects the defendant, Tyshaun Holloway, whose sentence remains as imposed by the trial court.
- Why didn't the court evaluate whether the sentence was too harsh?
- Because Holloway knowingly and voluntarily gave up his right to appeal, precedent bars the appellate court from reviewing sentencing claims in that situation.
- Can Holloway still challenge the sentence in some other way?
- Possibly, but this decision affirms the sentence on direct appeal; to challenge further he would need to identify a legal basis that is not barred by the waiver (for example, a collateral post-conviction application alleging ineffective assistance of counsel or involuntary plea), and should consult counsel.
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 Holloway - 2026 NY Slip Op 02671 People v Holloway 2026 NY Slip Op 02671 April 29, 2026 Appellate Division, Second Department The People of the State of New York, respondent, v Tyshaun Holloway, appellant. (S.C.I. No. 75606/23) Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department Decided on April 29, 2026 2023-10534 Betsy Barros, J.P. Valerie Brathwaite Nelson Barry E. Warhit Lourdes M. Ventura Susan Quirk, JJ. Twyla Carter, New York, NY (Rebecca D. Martin of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Julian Joiris of counsel; Caleb Otero 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 (Jane C. Tully, J.), imposed October 27, 2023, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive. ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed. The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal ( see People v Thomas , 34 NY3d 545; People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention that the sentence imposed was excessive ( see People v Lopez , 6 NY3d at 255). BARROS, J.P., BRATHWAITE NELSON, WARHIT, VENTURA and QUIRK, JJ., concur. ENTER: Darrell M. Joseph