People v. GervasioPeople v. Gervasio
We agree with defendant that his waiver of the right to appeal was invalid. The written waiver at issue here was “intended to be as broad as the law allows” and purported to “encompass[] all issues arising from this criminal proceeding.” Although we have excused overly-broad written waivers where the court‘s oral colloquy with the defendant “still permit[ted] the conclusion that the counseled defendant understood the distinction that some appellate review survived” (People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 561 [2019]; see People v Brunson, 185 AD3d 1300, 1300 n [2020], lv denied 36 NY3d 928 [2020]; People v Martin, 179 AD3d 1385, 1386 [2020]), County Court‘s terse discussion of defendant‘s appellate rights fell short of drawing that distinction. Accordingly, defendant‘s challenge to the severity of the sentence imposed is not precluded. However, as defendant received the minimum sentence that could be imposed given his status as a second felony offender (see
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Clark, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.