People v. Gramling

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gramling

269 A.D.2d 825, 703 N.Y.S.2d 784, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1744

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

DecidedFebruary 16, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 269 A.D.2d 825 (People v. Gramling) 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. Gramling, 269 A.D.2d 825, 703 N.Y.S.2d 784, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1744 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that he is entitled to specific performance of the alleged plea agreement. An off-the-record promise made in the course of the plea bargaining process is generally not entitled to judicial recognition (see, People v Danny G., 61 NY2d 169, 173-174; People v Reyes, 167 AD2d 920, 921, lv denied 77 NY2d 842). The promise that defendant contends was made does not appear in the record, and defendant agreed at the time of his guilty plea that no sentencing promise had been made (see, People v Salvagni, 199 AD2d 680; see also, People v Hoang, 198 AD2d 896, 897, lv denied 83 NY2d 859). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Lamont, J. — Robbery, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that he is entitled to specific performance of the alleged plea agreement. An off-the-record promise made in the course of the plea bargaining process is generally not entitled to judicial recognition (see, People v Danny G., 61 NY2d 169, 173-174; People v Reyes, 167 AD2d 920, 921, lv denied 77 NY2d 842). The promise that defendant contends was made does not appear in the record, and defendant agreed at the time of his guilty plea that no sentencing promise had been made (see, People v Salvagni, 199 AD2d 680; see also, People v Hoang, 198 AD2d 896, 897, lv denied 83 NY2d 859). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Lamont, J. — Robbery, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 825, 703 N.Y.S.2d 784, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gramling-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack