People v. SulsonaPeople v. Sulsona
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). The record does not demonstrate that the defendant “grasped the concept of the appeal waiver and the nature of the right he was forgoing” (People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 267 [2011]; see People v DeSimone, 80 NY2d 273, 283 [1992]; People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133 [2014]). The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court erred in
Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Roman and Maltese, JJ., concur.