Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Kristine Bialy-Viau of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (Bradley W. Oastler of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Stephen J. Dougherty, J.), rendered June 1, 2022. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, reckless endangerment in the first degree, unlawful fleeing a police officer in a motor vehicle in the third degree and tampering with physical evidence.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]), reckless endangerment in the first degree (§ 120.25), unlawful fleeing a police officer in a motor vehicle in the third degree (§ 270.25), and tampering with physical evidence (§ 215.40 [2]).

We agree with defendant that her waiver of the right to appeal was invalid. County Court's oral colloquy "mischaracterized [the waiver] as an absolute bar to the taking of an appeal" (People v McCrayer, 199 AD3d 1401, 1401 [4th Dept 2021]; see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545, 565 [2019], cert denied 589 US &mdash, 140 S Ct 2634 [2020]) and, although the record establishes that defendant executed a written waiver of the right to appeal, the written waiver "does not cure the deficient oral colloquy because the court did not inquire of defendant whether [she] understood the written waiver or . . . had read the waiver before signing it" (People v Augello, 222 AD3d 1398, 1399 [4th Dept 2023], lv denied 41 NY3d 942 [2024]). Nonetheless, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Lindley, J.P., Bannister, Ogden, Nowak and DelConte, JJ.