People v. Alden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alden

189 A.D.2d 1051, 593 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 766

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 28, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 189 A.D.2d 1051 (People v. Alden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Alden, 189 A.D.2d 1051, 593 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 766 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered [1052]*1052May 11, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of robbery in the first degree.

Defendant’s only contention on this appeal is that his sentence of 3 to 9 years’ imprisonment is harsh and excessive. Defendant was permitted to plead guilty to one count of robbery in the first degree in full satisfaction of a three-count indictment. In addition, defendant pleaded guilty knowing that he would receive the sentence imposed by County Court. Finally, given that defendant received less than the harshest possible sentence, we find that neither his youth nor his difficulties with drug and alcohol abuse justify reduction of the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Mackey, 136 AD2d 780, lv denied 71 NY2d 899).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered [1052]*1052May 11, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of robbery in the first degree.

Defendant’s only contention on this appeal is that his sentence of 3 to 9 years’ imprisonment is harsh and excessive. Defendant was permitted to plead guilty to one count of robbery in the first degree in full satisfaction of a three-count indictment. In addition, defendant pleaded guilty knowing that he would receive the sentence imposed by County Court. Finally, given that defendant received less than the harshest possible sentence, we find that neither his youth nor his difficulties with drug and alcohol abuse justify reduction of the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Mackey, 136 AD2d 780, lv denied 71 NY2d 899).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 A.D.2d 1051, 593 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alden-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack