| People v Sealey |
| 2020 NY Slip Op 05946 [187 AD3d 1067] |
| October 21, 2020 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Jaime Sealey, Appellant. |
Yasmin Daley Duncan, Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Anna K. Diehn of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Peter M.Forman, J.), rendered November 14, 2017, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlledsubstance in the third degree and bribing a witness, upon his plea of guilty, and imposingsentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid because the CountyCourt's oral colloquy mischaracterized the appellate rights waived as encompassing a bar to filingan appellate brief and the loss of attendant rights to counsel and poor person relief (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d545, 560-564 [2019]; People v Walder, 186 AD3d 1272 [2d Dept 2020]; People vHoward, 183 AD3d 640 [2020]). These defects were not cured by the terms of thewritten appeal waiver form which repeated many of the mischaracterizations contained in thecourt's oral colloquy (see People vHoward, 183 AD3d 640 [2020]). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude appellatereview of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see id.; People v Fuller, 163 AD3d 715[2018]).
However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80[1982]). Rivera, J.P., Maltese, Barros, Brathwaite Nelson and Iannacci, JJ., concur.