People v. Kirkegaard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kirkegaard

186 A.D.2d 300, 587 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10603

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

DecidedSeptember 17, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 300 (People v. Kirkegaard) 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. Kirkegaard, 186 A.D.2d 300, 587 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10603 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Mathews, J.), rendered April 5, 1991, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that her sentence of 2 to 6 years’ imprisonment is harsh and excessive. Defendant pleaded guilty knowing that she would receive the sentence ultimately imposed by County Court. In addition, as a part of the plea arrangement a pending misdemeanor charge was withdrawn. In light of these circumstances, as well as defendant’s past criminal history, we find no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Gray, 131 AD2d 590; People v Neira, 130 AD2d 518, lv denied 70 NY2d 715).

Weiss, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Mahoney and Casey, 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 (Mathews, J.), rendered April 5, 1991, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that her sentence of 2 to 6 years’ imprisonment is harsh and excessive. Defendant pleaded guilty knowing that she would receive the sentence ultimately imposed by County Court. In addition, as a part of the plea arrangement a pending misdemeanor charge was withdrawn. In light of these circumstances, as well as defendant’s past criminal history, we find no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Gray, 131 AD2d 590; People v Neira, 130 AD2d 518, lv denied 70 NY2d 715).

Weiss, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 300, 587 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kirkegaard-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack