Opinion
565 KA 20-00927
07-28-2023
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert HUMPHREY, Defendant-Appellant.
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (SUSAN R. HUTCHISON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DANIEL J. MATTLE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (SUSAN R. HUTCHISON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JOHN J. FLYNN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DANIEL J. MATTLE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, BANNISTER, MONTOUR, AND GREENWOOD, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his guilty plea of two counts of attempted robbery in the first degree ( Penal Law §§ 110.00, 160.15 [4] ). We agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal is not valid because County Court's oral colloquy mischaracterized it as an "absolute bar" to the taking of an appeal ( People v. Thomas , 34 N.Y.3d 545, 565, 122 N.Y.S.3d 226, 144 N.E.3d 970 [2019], cert denied ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S.Ct. 2634, 206 L.Ed.2d 512 [2020] ; see People v. Williams , 186 A.D.3d 1112, 1113, 127 N.Y.S.3d 366 [4th Dept. 2020] ). Further, although defendant also signed a written waiver of the right to appeal at that time, we may not consider whether that document corrected any defects in the court's oral colloquy because "[t]he court did not inquire of defendant whether he understood the written waiver or whether he had even read the waiver before signing it" ( People v. Bradshaw , 18 N.Y.3d 257, 262, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 [2011] ; see People v. Mobayed , 158 A.D.3d 1221, 1222, 70 N.Y.S.3d 267 [4th Dept. 2018], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 1015, 78 N.Y.S.3d 285, 102 N.E.3d 1066 [2018] ). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.