People v. Andrews

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Andrews

249 A.D.2d 840, 672 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4848

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

DecidedApril 30, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D.2d 840 (People v. Andrews) 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. Andrews, 249 A.D.2d 840, 672 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4848 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a [841]*841judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), rendered June 6, 1996, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced to a prison term of IV2 to 4V2 years. Defendant appeals, contending that because this is her first felony conviction, the sentence is harsh and excessive. We disagree. While the sentence imposed by County Court was slightly more severe than the statutory minimum sentence of 1 to 3 years (see, Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [b]; [3] [b]), it was less than the negotiated maximum of 2 to 6 years. This, together with the lack of any evidence of extraordinary circumstances meriting a reduction, lead us to conclude that the sentence imposed by County Court should not be disturbed (see, People v Hayes, 236 AD2d 738, lv denied 89 NY2d 1094; People v Sullivan, 223 AD2d 893).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Peters and Spain, 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 [841]*841judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), rendered June 6, 1996, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced to a prison term of IV2 to 4V2 years. Defendant appeals, contending that because this is her first felony conviction, the sentence is harsh and excessive. We disagree. While the sentence imposed by County Court was slightly more severe than the statutory minimum sentence of 1 to 3 years (see, Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [b]; [3] [b]), it was less than the negotiated maximum of 2 to 6 years. This, together with the lack of any evidence of extraordinary circumstances meriting a reduction, lead us to conclude that the sentence imposed by County Court should not be disturbed (see, People v Hayes, 236 AD2d 738, lv denied 89 NY2d 1094; People v Sullivan, 223 AD2d 893).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 840, 672 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-andrews-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack