People v. Patinha

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Patinha

188 A.D.2d 926, 592 N.Y.S.2d 282, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14693

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 188 A.D.2d 926 (People v. Patinha) 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. Patinha, 188 A.D.2d 926, 592 N.Y.S.2d 282, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Monserrate, J.), rendered July 7, 1989, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant’s only contention on this appeal is that his sentence of 3Vá to 10 years’ imprisonment was harsh and excessive. Defendant pleaded guilty knowing that he would receive the sentence imposed by County Court. Further, as part of the plea bargain a second indictment pending against defendant was dismissed. In light of these facts, as well as the fact that the sentence was not the harshest possible, we find no basis to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Mackey, 136 AD2d 780, lv denied 71 NY2d 899).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Crew III, Mahoney and Harvey, 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 (Monserrate, J.), rendered July 7, 1989, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant’s only contention on this appeal is that his sentence of 3Vá to 10 years’ imprisonment was harsh and excessive. Defendant pleaded guilty knowing that he would receive the sentence imposed by County Court. Further, as part of the plea bargain a second indictment pending against defendant was dismissed. In light of these facts, as well as the fact that the sentence was not the harshest possible, we find no basis to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Mackey, 136 AD2d 780, lv denied 71 NY2d 899).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Crew III, Mahoney and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.D.2d 926, 592 N.Y.S.2d 282, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-patinha-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack