People v. Bazemore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bazemore

203 A.D.2d 25, 610 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3271

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

DecidedApril 5, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 203 A.D.2d 25 (People v. Bazemore) 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. Bazemore, 203 A.D.2d 25, 610 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3271 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), rendered December 10, 1991, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 1 year, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s Clayton motion (People v Clayton, 41 AD2d 204) was properly denied since the prosecutor’s improper inclusion of sealed records on the motion was not the type of misconduct that warrants dismissal in furtherance of justice (see, People v Insignares, 109 AD2d 221, 232, lv denied 65 NY2d 928). Inasmuch as defendant did not wish to withdraw his plea even in the face of the sentencing court’s offer to grant this relief based on doubt as to the appropriateness of the bargained for sentence, and since the prosecutor apparently would not consent to a lesser sentence, there was no error in the court’s imposition of the sentence originally agreed upon (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), rendered December 10, 1991, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 1 year, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s Clayton motion (People v Clayton, 41 AD2d 204) was properly denied since the prosecutor’s improper inclusion of sealed records on the motion was not the type of misconduct that warrants dismissal in furtherance of justice (see, People v Insignares, 109 AD2d 221, 232, lv denied 65 NY2d 928). Inasmuch as defendant did not wish to withdraw his plea even in the face of the sentencing court’s offer to grant this relief based on doubt as to the appropriateness of the bargained for sentence, and since the prosecutor apparently would not consent to a lesser sentence, there was no error in the court’s imposition of the sentence originally agreed upon (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 25, 610 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bazemore-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack