People v. Iudice

168 A.D.2d 512
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 10, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 A.D.2d 512 (People v. Iudice) 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. Iudice, 168 A.D.2d 512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mclnerney, J.), imposed November 20, 1989, upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate term of 4 to 8 years’ imprisonment.

Ordered that the sentence is modified, on the law, by reducing the sentence imposed to an indeterminate term of 3Vz years’ to 7 years’ imprisonment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

The People concede that the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court is illegal. The defendant was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, a class D felony (Penal Law § 220.31). Since the defendant was properly adjudicated a second felony offender, the maximum term of imprisonment authorized under law is to 7 years (see, Penal Law § 70.06 [3] [d]; [4] [b]). Thus the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court exceeded the statutory maximum.

The defendant is a prior felony offender who was originally promised a sentence of to 5 years’ imprisonment as part of a plea bargain. He failed to appear for sentencing and was produced almost six months later pursuant to a bench warrant. At sentencing, in return for the prosecutor’s agreement to forbear from prosecuting him for bail jumping, the defendant agreed to accept an enhanced sentence on the instant matter of 4 to 8 years’ imprisonment. While, as stated above, that sentence was illegal, the maximum authorized term of 3Vz to 7 years is clearly appropriate under the circumstances [513]*513and we have reduced the sentence accordingly. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Martin
278 A.D.2d 743 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 A.D.2d 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-iudice-nyappdiv-1990.