People v. James

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. James

211 A.D.2d 922, 624 N.Y.S.2d 969, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 237

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 211 A.D.2d 922 (People v. James) 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. James, 211 A.D.2d 922, 624 N.Y.S.2d 969, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J.), rendered May 7, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree.

We reject defendant’s contention that his negotiated sentence of eight years to life should be reduced to a more lenient sentence. An examination of the plea allocution minutes reveals that defendant, who received a substantial benefit by being allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge in a multicount indictment, entered his plea with full knowledge of what the range of sentencing would be. Under the circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Casey 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 Broome County (Smith, J.), rendered May 7, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree.

We reject defendant’s contention that his negotiated sentence of eight years to life should be reduced to a more lenient sentence. An examination of the plea allocution minutes reveals that defendant, who received a substantial benefit by being allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge in a multicount indictment, entered his plea with full knowledge of what the range of sentencing would be. Under the circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 922, 624 N.Y.S.2d 969, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-james-nyappdiv-1995.