People v. Di Benedetto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Di Benedetto

115 A.D.2d 554, 496 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54965

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

DecidedDecember 9, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 115 A.D.2d 554 (People v. Di Benedetto) 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. Di Benedetto, 115 A.D.2d 554, 496 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Slavin, J.), both rendered January 19, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree under indictment No. 6077/81 arid criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under indictment No. 3309/82, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant failed to appear on the date set for sentencing, and in accordance with a promise, the court imposed higher sentences. Defendant has no basis to complain where the court sentenced him to concurrent indeterminate terms of 3 to 9 years’ imprisonment, when it had promised consecutive indeterminate sentences of 5 to 15 years’ imprisonment if he failed to appear (cf. People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Defendant’s contention that the court should have permitted him to withdraw his pleas, rather than imposing increased sentences, was not preserved for review (cf. People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636), and, in any event, is without merit. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Brown, Niehoff and Fiber, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Slavin, J.), both rendered January 19, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree under indictment No. 6077/81 arid criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under indictment No. 3309/82, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant failed to appear on the date set for sentencing, and in accordance with a promise, the court imposed higher sentences. Defendant has no basis to complain where the court sentenced him to concurrent indeterminate terms of 3 to 9 years’ imprisonment, when it had promised consecutive indeterminate sentences of 5 to 15 years’ imprisonment if he failed to appear (cf. People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Defendant’s contention that the court should have permitted him to withdraw his pleas, rather than imposing increased sentences, was not preserved for review (cf. People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636), and, in any event, is without merit. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Brown, Niehoff and Fiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A.D.2d 554, 496 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-di-benedetto-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack