People v. Haniff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Haniff

233 A.D.2d 626, 649 N.Y.S.2d 825, 650 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11702

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 14, 1996·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.), rendered July 25, 1995, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced as a predicate felony offender to a prison term of 9 to 18 years. Defendant appeals, contending that the sentence imposed by County Court was harsh and excessive. We disagree. The sentence, which falls within the statutory guidelines, was the agreed-upon result of a plea bargain, pursuant to which a second charge against defendant was dropped. This fact, together with defendant’s extensive criminal history, leads to the conclusion that the sentence does not constitute an abuse of discretion on [627]*627the part of County Court (see, People v Reid, 224 AD2d 728, 729). Accordingly, it will not be disturbed.

Mikoll, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., 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 Albany County (Breslin, J.), rendered July 25, 1995, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced as a predicate felony offender to a prison term of 9 to 18 years. Defendant appeals, contending that the sentence imposed by County Court was harsh and excessive. We disagree. The sentence, which falls within the statutory guidelines, was the agreed-upon result of a plea bargain, pursuant to which a second charge against defendant was dropped. This fact, together with defendant’s extensive criminal history, leads to the conclusion that the sentence does not constitute an abuse of discretion on [627]*627the part of County Court (see, People v Reid, 224 AD2d 728, 729). Accordingly, it will not be disturbed.

Mikoll, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

People v. Haniff, 233 A.D.2d 626, 649 N.Y.S.2d 825, 650 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11702 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

233 A.D.2d 626 (People v. Haniff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related