People v. O'Dell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. O'Dell

91 A.D.3d 979, 935 N.Y.2d 907

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 5, 2012·Published

Opinion

Garry, J.

We affirm. Initially, we agree with defendant that he did not waive his right to appeal as part of his plea agreement. Turning to his claim that his sentence is harsh and excessive, we find it to be unpersuasive. In light of the seriousness of defendant’s crimes and the fact that the sentence was agreed to as part of the plea agreement, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Hilder, 79 AD3d 1459 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 798 [2011]).

Peters, J.P, Rose, McCarthy and Egan 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

Garry, J.

We affirm. Initially, we agree with defendant that he did not waive his right to appeal as part of his plea agreement. Turning to his claim that his sentence is harsh and excessive, we find it to be unpersuasive. In light of the seriousness of defendant’s crimes and the fact that the sentence was agreed to as part of the plea agreement, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Hilder, 79 AD3d 1459 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 798 [2011]).

Peters, J.P, Rose, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

People v. O'Dell, 91 A.D.3d 979, 935 N.Y.2d 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

91 A.D.3d 979 (People v. O'Dell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related