People v. Salome

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Salome

159 A.D.2d 436, 554 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3076

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

DecidedMarch 29, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 159 A.D.2d 436 (People v. Salome) 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. Salome, 159 A.D.2d 436, 554 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3076 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J.), rendered on January 14, 1988, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of from 10 to 20 years, 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, lv denied [437]*43772 NY2d 918.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Asch and Smith, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J.), rendered on January 14, 1988, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of from 10 to 20 years, 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, lv denied [437]*43772 NY2d 918.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Asch and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 A.D.2d 436, 554 N.Y.S.2d 986, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3076, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-salome-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack