People v. Brand

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Brand

100 A.D.3d 1154, 953 N.Y.S.2d 726

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

DecidedNovember 15, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 100 A.D.3d 1154 (People v. Brand) 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. Brand, 100 A.D.3d 1154, 953 N.Y.S.2d 726 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main Jr., J.), rendered May 27, 2011, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

Following defendant’s plea of guilty to the crime of driving while intoxicated, he was sentenced to five years of probation. Thereafter, a petition alleging a violation of probation was filed against defendant. After defendant entered an admission to violating the terms and conditions of his probation, County Court revoked defendant’s probation and sentenced him, in accordance with the plea agreement, to a prison term of l2/a to 5 years. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Defendant’s sole argument on appeal is that his resentence is harsh and excessive. We are unpersuaded. The record demonstrates that defendant has a lengthy criminal history and that he failed to maintain his sobriety or follow through with treatment programs despite repeated opportunities to do so (see People v Ebert, 81 AD3d 1042 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 794 [2011]). Under the circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the resentence in the interest of justice (see People v Setzer, 83 AD3d 1123, 1123 [2011]).

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen, Stein, McCarthy and Garry, 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 Franklin County (Main Jr., J.), rendered May 27, 2011, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

Following defendant’s plea of guilty to the crime of driving while intoxicated, he was sentenced to five years of probation. Thereafter, a petition alleging a violation of probation was filed against defendant. After defendant entered an admission to violating the terms and conditions of his probation, County Court revoked defendant’s probation and sentenced him, in accordance with the plea agreement, to a prison term of l2/a to 5 years. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Defendant’s sole argument on appeal is that his resentence is harsh and excessive. We are unpersuaded. The record demonstrates that defendant has a lengthy criminal history and that he failed to maintain his sobriety or follow through with treatment programs despite repeated opportunities to do so (see People v Ebert, 81 AD3d 1042 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 794 [2011]). Under the circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the resentence in the interest of justice (see People v Setzer, 83 AD3d 1123, 1123 [2011]).

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen, Stein, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.3d 1154, 953 N.Y.S.2d 726, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-brand-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack