People v. LaMarche

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. LaMarche

253 A.D.2d 944, 678 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9491

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 17, 1998·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered February 9, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted burglary in the second degree in satisfaction of a superior court information and all other pending felony charges. He was sentenced to a prison term of IV2 to 3 years and ordered to pay restitution. Defendant appeals, contending that his sentence was harsh and excessive and should be reduced in the interest of justice. We disagree. Although the sentence was more harsh than that recommended in the presentence report, County Court was not bound by the Probation Department’s sentencing recommendation (see, People v Jarvis, 233 AD2d 632, 633, lv denied 89 NY2d 943). And given that the sentence imposed was the most lenient indeterminate sentence permissible by statute (see, Penal Law § 70.02), we find no reason to disturb it.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Spain, 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 St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered February 9, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted burglary in the second degree in satisfaction of a superior court information and all other pending felony charges. He was sentenced to a prison term of IV2 to 3 years and ordered to pay restitution. Defendant appeals, contending that his sentence was harsh and excessive and should be reduced in the interest of justice. We disagree. Although the sentence was more harsh than that recommended in the presentence report, County Court was not bound by the Probation Department’s sentencing recommendation (see, People v Jarvis, 233 AD2d 632, 633, lv denied 89 NY2d 943). And given that the sentence imposed was the most lenient indeterminate sentence permissible by statute (see, Penal Law § 70.02), we find no reason to disturb it.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

People v. LaMarche, 253 A.D.2d 944, 678 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9491 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

253 A.D.2d 944 (People v. LaMarche) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related