People v. Ilori

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ilori

58 A.D.3d 524, 870 N.Y.S.2d 784

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

DecidedJanuary 20, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 58 A.D.3d 524 (People v. Ilori) 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. Ilori, 58 A.D.3d 524, 870 N.Y.S.2d 784 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), rendered May 7, 2007, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of forgery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3V2 to 7 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of 2 to 4 years, and otherwise affirmed.

As the People concede, since the plea agreement did not contain a no-arrest or no-misconduct condition; or any other conditions, the court erred in enhancing, on the basis of a subsequent crime, the sentence it had promised defendant at the time of his plea (see People v Spina, 186 AD2d 9 [1992]). Therefore, the court should have imposed the promised sentence or granted defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea. Accordingly, we reduce the sentence to the term to which defendant had agreed. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Buckley, Acosta and Freedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), rendered May 7, 2007, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of forgery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3V2 to 7 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of 2 to 4 years, and otherwise affirmed.

As the People concede, since the plea agreement did not contain a no-arrest or no-misconduct condition; or any other conditions, the court erred in enhancing, on the basis of a subsequent crime, the sentence it had promised defendant at the time of his plea (see People v Spina, 186 AD2d 9 [1992]). Therefore, the court should have imposed the promised sentence or granted defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea. Accordingly, we reduce the sentence to the term to which defendant had agreed. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Buckley, Acosta and Freedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.3d 524, 870 N.Y.S.2d 784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ilori-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack