THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. DARIUS JONES ALSO KNOWN AS DARIUS JONES ALSO KNOWN AS DARIUS LAMAR JONES DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2025)

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 plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 220.16 [1]). Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court did not mischaracterize the waiver of the right to appeal as “an absolute bar to the taking of a first-tier direct appeal” (People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 558 [2019], cert denied — US —, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]). Instead, the court “followed the model colloquy nearly verbatim” (People v Figueroa, 230 AD3d 1581, 1582 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 1079 [2025]), and explained to defendant that he was “not actually giving up the right to file a notice of appeal” and that “there are certain issues that still can be raised” after a waiver of the right to appeal, including the voluntariness of the plea and the legality of the sentence (see People v Brinson, 240 AD3d 1376, 1377 [4th Dept 2025]; People v Edmonds, 229 AD3d 1275, 1277 [4th Dept 2024], lv denied 43 NY3d 930 [2025]). Defendant's subsequent refusal to sign a written waiver of the right to appeal is of no moment where, as here, “the oral waiver was adequate” (People v Thomas, 237 AD3d 1557, 1558 [4th Dept 2025], lv denied 43 NY3d 1059 [2025] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 257 [2006]).

Defendant's waiver encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).

Entered: November 21, 2025

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court