People v. Mata

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mata

169 A.D.2d 395

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A.D.2d 395 (People v. Mata) 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. Mata, 169 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bernard Jackson, J.), rendered on December 15, 1988, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing defendant to concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of 4 to 12 years on the first and second charges and 1 to 3 years on the third charge, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305.)

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms.” (People v Felman, 141 AD2d 889, 890, Iv denied 72 NY2d 918.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Kassal, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bernard Jackson, J.), rendered on December 15, 1988, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing defendant to concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of 4 to 12 years on the first and second charges and 1 to 3 years on the third charge, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305.)

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms.” (People v Felman, 141 AD2d 889, 890, Iv denied 72 NY2d 918.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Kassal, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A.D.2d 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mata-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack