People v. Gauvin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gauvin

190 A.D.2d 916, 593 N.Y.S.2d 594, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1074

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

DecidedFebruary 11, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 190 A.D.2d 916 (People v. Gauvin) 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. Gauvin, 190 A.D.2d 916, 593 N.Y.S.2d 594, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1074 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), rendered January 2, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree.

Defendant contends that his sentence of 2 to 4 years’ imprisonment was harsh and excessive. Although the sentence was the harshest allowed for the crime of which defendant was convicted, defendant was allowed to plead guilty to a reduced charge of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree in satisfaction of a two-count indictment charging more serious crimes. In addition, the sentence was consistent with the terms of the plea bargain. Any lesser sentence was conditioned upon defendant’s cooperation with law enforcement authorities. Given that defendant does not controvert the People’s assertion that he failed to cooperate, County Court was entitled to sentence defendant to the harshest sentence (see, People v Chevalier, 92 AD2d 944). In consideration of these facts, as well as defendant’s criminal record, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed (see, People v Mackey, 136 AD2d 780, lv denied 71 NY2d 899).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Harvey, 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 Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), rendered January 2, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree.

Defendant contends that his sentence of 2 to 4 years’ imprisonment was harsh and excessive. Although the sentence was the harshest allowed for the crime of which defendant was convicted, defendant was allowed to plead guilty to a reduced charge of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree in satisfaction of a two-count indictment charging more serious crimes. In addition, the sentence was consistent with the terms of the plea bargain. Any lesser sentence was conditioned upon defendant’s cooperation with law enforcement authorities. Given that defendant does not controvert the People’s assertion that he failed to cooperate, County Court was entitled to sentence defendant to the harshest sentence (see, People v Chevalier, 92 AD2d 944). In consideration of these facts, as well as defendant’s criminal record, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed (see, People v Mackey, 136 AD2d 780, lv denied 71 NY2d 899).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 A.D.2d 916, 593 N.Y.S.2d 594, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gauvin-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack