People v. Flores

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Flores

167 A.D.2d 160, 561 N.Y.S.2d 460, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13274

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 8, 1990·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leon Becker, J.), rendered on January 5, 1988, convicting defendant, on his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 7 to 21 years, is unanimously affirmed.

Defendant pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the first degree and was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain to a term of 7 to 21 years. On appeal, 11 years after the crime although only approximately two years after the plea, defendant argues that his sentence was unlawful pursuant to Penal Law § 70.04 in that, as a second violent felony offender, he should have received a minimum sentence of one half the maximum, not one third the maximum. Accordingly, it is urged that since he relied upon an illegal sentence promise, the sentence as imposed should be vacated. However, where a defendant is the beneficiary of an error, and no prejudice ensues to him, a vacatur of the sentence is not required. (People v Coffey, 124 AD2d 814.) Concur—Ross, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leon Becker, J.), rendered on January 5, 1988, convicting defendant, on his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 7 to 21 years, is unanimously affirmed.

Defendant pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the first degree and was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain to a term of 7 to 21 years. On appeal, 11 years after the crime although only approximately two years after the plea, defendant argues that his sentence was unlawful pursuant to Penal Law § 70.04 in that, as a second violent felony offender, he should have received a minimum sentence of one half the maximum, not one third the maximum. Accordingly, it is urged that since he relied upon an illegal sentence promise, the sentence as imposed should be vacated. However, where a defendant is the beneficiary of an error, and no prejudice ensues to him, a vacatur of the sentence is not required. (People v Coffey, 124 AD2d 814.) Concur—Ross, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.

People v. Flores, 167 A.D.2d 160, 561 N.Y.S.2d 460, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13274 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

167 A.D.2d 160 (People v. Flores) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related