People v. Paulin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paulin

265 A.D.2d 737, 696 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10932

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 28, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Eidens, J.), rendered May 6, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree and, pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, waived his right to appeal and was sentenced as a second felony offender to an indeterminate sentence of 7 to 14 years in prison. Defendant now argues that this sentence was harsh and excessive. Inasmuch as defendant waived his right to appeal as part of a knowing, voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty, this issue has not been preserved for our review (see, People v Buchanan, 236 AD2d 741, lv denied 89 NY2d 1032). Nevertheless, were we to reach this issue, we would find no evidence of extraordinary circumstances or abuse of discretion warranting a modification of the sentence imposed in the interest of justice given, inter alia, defendant’s lengthy criminal history and the underlying circumstances (see, People [738]*738v Blair, 263 AD2d 614; People v Brown, 251 AD2d 694, lv denied 92 NY2d 1029).

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Spain, Graffeo and Mugglin, 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 Schenectady County (Eidens, J.), rendered May 6, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree and, pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, waived his right to appeal and was sentenced as a second felony offender to an indeterminate sentence of 7 to 14 years in prison. Defendant now argues that this sentence was harsh and excessive. Inasmuch as defendant waived his right to appeal as part of a knowing, voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty, this issue has not been preserved for our review (see, People v Buchanan, 236 AD2d 741, lv denied 89 NY2d 1032). Nevertheless, were we to reach this issue, we would find no evidence of extraordinary circumstances or abuse of discretion warranting a modification of the sentence imposed in the interest of justice given, inter alia, defendant’s lengthy criminal history and the underlying circumstances (see, People [738]*738v Blair, 263 AD2d 614; People v Brown, 251 AD2d 694, lv denied 92 NY2d 1029).

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Spain, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

People v. Paulin, 265 A.D.2d 737, 696 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10932 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

265 A.D.2d 737 (People v. Paulin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related