People v. Blair

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Blair

263 A.D.2d 614, 692 N.Y.S.2d 616, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7838

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

DecidedJuly 8, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 263 A.D.2d 614 (People v. Blair) 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. Blair, 263 A.D.2d 614, 692 N.Y.S.2d 616, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Rensselaer County (McGrath, J.), rendered January 15, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of sodomy in the first degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of sodomy in the first degree as a result of his molestation of a six-year-old child. Pursuant to his plea agreement, defendant waived his right to appeal and was sentenced to a term of SVa to 7 years in prison. [615]*615Defendant now argues that this sentence was harsh and excessive but does not contest its lawfulness. However, because defendant waived his right to appeal as part of a knowing, voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty, he has failed to preserve this issue for our review (see, People v George, 261 AD2d 711; People v Buchanan, 236 AD2d 741, lv denied 89 NY2d 1032). Nevertheless, were we to consider defendant’s challenge to his agreed-upon sentence, we would find no abuse of discretion by the sentencing court and no evidence of extraordinary circumstances warranting a modification in the interest of justice given the nature of this crime against a young child (see, People v Brown, 251 AD2d 694, lv denied 92 NY2d 1029; People v Motter, 235 AD2d 582, 589, lv denied 89 NY2d 1038).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Spain and Carpinello, 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 Rensselaer County (McGrath, J.), rendered January 15, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of sodomy in the first degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of sodomy in the first degree as a result of his molestation of a six-year-old child. Pursuant to his plea agreement, defendant waived his right to appeal and was sentenced to a term of SVa to 7 years in prison. [615]*615Defendant now argues that this sentence was harsh and excessive but does not contest its lawfulness. However, because defendant waived his right to appeal as part of a knowing, voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty, he has failed to preserve this issue for our review (see, People v George, 261 AD2d 711; People v Buchanan, 236 AD2d 741, lv denied 89 NY2d 1032). Nevertheless, were we to consider defendant’s challenge to his agreed-upon sentence, we would find no abuse of discretion by the sentencing court and no evidence of extraordinary circumstances warranting a modification in the interest of justice given the nature of this crime against a young child (see, People v Brown, 251 AD2d 694, lv denied 92 NY2d 1029; People v Motter, 235 AD2d 582, 589, lv denied 89 NY2d 1038).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D.2d 614, 692 N.Y.S.2d 616, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-blair-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack