People v. Hodge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hodge

205 A.D.2d 817, 615 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5900

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

DecidedJune 2, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 817 (People v. Hodge) 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. Hodge, 205 A.D.2d 817, 615 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5900 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Harris, J.), rendered July, 15, 1993, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the third degree.

Even if defendant had not knowingly waived his right to appeal, we would nonetheless reject defendant’s contention that his negotiated sentence of 2 to 4 years in prison for pleading guilty to burglary in the third degree is harsh or excessive. Defendant received a substantial benefit by being allowed to plead as he did in satisfaction of a two-count indictment, and the sentence he received is the most lenient available for a second felony offender. Under the circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Casey, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., 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 (Harris, J.), rendered July, 15, 1993, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the third degree.

Even if defendant had not knowingly waived his right to appeal, we would nonetheless reject defendant’s contention that his negotiated sentence of 2 to 4 years in prison for pleading guilty to burglary in the third degree is harsh or excessive. Defendant received a substantial benefit by being allowed to plead as he did in satisfaction of a two-count indictment, and the sentence he received is the most lenient available for a second felony offender. Under the circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Casey, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 817, 615 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5900, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hodge-nyappdiv-1994.