People v. Beha

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Beha

241 A.D.2d 572, 659 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7235

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 3, 1997·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered February 26, 1996, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the second degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to assault in the second degree as the result of an incident in which the victim lost an eye after defendant hit him with a broken glass. Defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender to a determinate prison term of 5V2 years, a sentence he challenges on the ground that it is harsh and excessive. Given that defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement, and in light of both the serious nature of the crime and defendant’s lengthy criminal history, the sentence is appropriate and we find no extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see, People v Osgood, 206 AD2d 571; People v Edwards, 201 AD2d 813, lv denied 83 NY2d 852).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, 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 St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered February 26, 1996, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the second degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to assault in the second degree as the result of an incident in which the victim lost an eye after defendant hit him with a broken glass. Defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender to a determinate prison term of 5V2 years, a sentence he challenges on the ground that it is harsh and excessive. Given that defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement, and in light of both the serious nature of the crime and defendant’s lengthy criminal history, the sentence is appropriate and we find no extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see, People v Osgood, 206 AD2d 571; People v Edwards, 201 AD2d 813, lv denied 83 NY2d 852).

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

People v. Beha, 241 A.D.2d 572, 659 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7235 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

241 A.D.2d 572 (People v. Beha) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related