Nicole D. Gadbois, Poughkeepsie, NY, for appellant.
David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, NY (Robert H. Middlemiss of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, and HECTOR D. LaSALLE, JJ.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (De Rosa, J.), rendered October 4, 2013, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid (see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 ). 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 N.Y.3d 257, 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; see People v. Springer, 109 A.D.3d 557, 970 N.Y.S.2d 462 ; People v. Johnson, 109 A.D.3d 489, 970 N.Y.S.2d 91 ; People v. Collins, 104 A.D.3d 785, 960 N.Y.S.2d 328 ). Notwithstanding the defendant's execution of the written waiver form, it cannot be said that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to appeal (see People v. Elmer, 19 N.Y.3d 501, 510, 950 N.Y.S.2d 77, 973 N.E.2d 172 ; People v. Bradshaw, 18 N.Y.3d at 267, 938 N.Y.S.2d 254, 961 N.E.2d 645 ; People v. Singleton, 129 A.D.3d 748, 8 N.Y.S.3d 915 ; People v. Johnson, 113 A.D.3d 635, 977 N.Y.S.2d 896 ; People v. Springer, 109 A.D.3d at 557–558, 970 N.Y.S.2d 462 ; People v. Vasquez, 101 A.D.3d 1054, 1055, 956 N.Y.S.2d 171 ).
Although the defendant's claim that the County Court erred in imposing a sentence greater than what had been promised in the original plea agreement would survive even a valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Bracy, 131 A.D.3d 538, 539, 15 N.Y.S.3d 397 ; People v. Youmans, 106 A.D.3d 1036, 965 N.Y.S.2d 381 ; People v. Arrington, 94 A.D.3d 903, 941 N.Y.S.2d 877 ), the defendant is, in any event, not entitled to relief on this claim. The defendant not bound by its original promise, and its imposition of an enhanced sentence was proper (see People v. Hicks, 98 N.Y.2d 185, 746 N.Y.S.2d 441, 774 N.E.2d 205 ; People v. Figgins, 87 N.Y.2d 840, 841, 637 N.Y.S.2d 684, 661 N.E.2d 156 ; People v. Mazyck, 117 A.D.3d 1084, 1085, 986 N.Y.S.2d 556 ; People v. Patterson, 106 A.D.3d 757, 964 N.Y.S.2d 233 ; People v. Bacchus, 103 A.D.3d 744, 745, 959 N.Y.S.2d 710 ; People v. White, 215 A.D.2d 791, 627 N.Y.S.2d 957 ).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.