People v McDowell
2020 NY Slip Op 01642 [181 AD3d 716]
March 11, 2020
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, April 29, 2020


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
James C. McDowell, Appellant.

Janet E. Sabel, New York, NY (Lauren E. Jones of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Seth M. Lieberman of counsel; Marielle Burnett on the memorandum), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Matthew Sciarrino, J.), imposed June 5, 2017, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The record does not establish that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257 [2011]). The Supreme Court mischaracterized the nature of the right to appeal by stating that the defendant's sentence and conviction would be final (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 568-570 [2019]) and the written waiver form did not overcome the ambiguities in the court's explanation of the right to appeal as it did not contain clarifying language that appellate review remained available for select issues (see id.). Thus, the purported waiver does not preclude this Court's review of the defendant's excessive sentence claim (see People v Fuller, 163 AD3d 715, 715 [2018]).

However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Dillon, J.P., Austin, Roman, Hinds-Radix and Christopher, JJ., concur.