People v. Dolbow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dolbow

170 A.D.2d 892, 566 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2464

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 170 A.D.2d 892 (People v. Dolbow) 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. Dolbow, 170 A.D.2d 892, 566 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2464 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Mathews, J.), rendered October 19, 1989, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Upon her plea of guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, defendant was sentenced to a prison term of 2 to 6 years. Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that the sentence is harsh and excessive and should be reduced in the interest of justice to 1 to 3 years’ imprisonment. Defendant, who was represented by competent counsel, pleaded guilty knowing that she would receive the sentence ultimately imposed by County Court. In light of this and the fact that her 13-year-old son was one of the parties to whom she supplied cocaine, we do not find that her sentence was harsh or excessive (see, People v Salgado, 156 AD2d 492, lv denied 75 NY2d 817; People v Wolmart, 140 AD2d 733, lv denied 72 NY2d 926).

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Crew III, and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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 Broome County (Mathews, J.), rendered October 19, 1989, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Upon her plea of guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, defendant was sentenced to a prison term of 2 to 6 years. Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that the sentence is harsh and excessive and should be reduced in the interest of justice to 1 to 3 years’ imprisonment. Defendant, who was represented by competent counsel, pleaded guilty knowing that she would receive the sentence ultimately imposed by County Court. In light of this and the fact that her 13-year-old son was one of the parties to whom she supplied cocaine, we do not find that her sentence was harsh or excessive (see, People v Salgado, 156 AD2d 492, lv denied 75 NY2d 817; People v Wolmart, 140 AD2d 733, lv denied 72 NY2d 926).

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Crew III, and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.D.2d 892, 566 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dolbow-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack