People v. Fitzgerald

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fitzgerald

239 A.D.2d 711, 657 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5258

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

DecidedMay 15, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 711 (People v. Fitzgerald) 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. Fitzgerald, 239 A.D.2d 711, 657 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5258 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main, Jr., J.), rendered January 8, 1996, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the third degree.

Defendant, a man in his 50s, was convicted upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the third degree for having sex [712]*712with a 15-year-old female. At the time of defendant’s plea, no specific promises were made with respect to the sentence to be imposed. We reject the contention that County Court abused its discretion in imposing a prison term of 1 to 3 years. Although this sentence was harsher than that which was recommended by the People or the probation officer, it is well settled that sentencing is a matter within the discretion of the court (see, People v Jarvis, 233 AD2d 632, 633, lv denied 89 NY2d 943). Contrary to defendant’s assertions, we find no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey, 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 Franklin County (Main, Jr., J.), rendered January 8, 1996, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the third degree.

Defendant, a man in his 50s, was convicted upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the third degree for having sex [712]*712with a 15-year-old female. At the time of defendant’s plea, no specific promises were made with respect to the sentence to be imposed. We reject the contention that County Court abused its discretion in imposing a prison term of 1 to 3 years. Although this sentence was harsher than that which was recommended by the People or the probation officer, it is well settled that sentencing is a matter within the discretion of the court (see, People v Jarvis, 233 AD2d 632, 633, lv denied 89 NY2d 943). Contrary to defendant’s assertions, we find no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 A.D.2d 711, 657 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fitzgerald-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack