People v. Sampson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sampson

214 A.D.2d 1033, 626 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6810

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

DecidedApril 28, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 214 A.D.2d 1033 (People v. Sampson) 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. Sampson, 214 A.D.2d 1033, 626 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6810 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and matter remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: In exchange for defendant’s plea of guilty to one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in full satisfaction of a pending indictment, County Court agreed to impose a sentence of imprisonment of 1 to 3 years. The court warned defendant that, if he was arrested on new charges while on release pending sentencing, the court’s sentencing promise of 1 to 3 years would no longer stand and defendant could be sentenced to 5 to 15 years. Defendant agreed and his plea of guilty was accepted. While on release pending sentencing, defendant was arrested on a new charge of robbery in the first degree. The court satisfied itself that there was a basis for the arrest (see, People v Outley, 80 NY2d 702), and, after denying the request of defendant to withdraw his plea, sentenced defendant to 7 to 21 years.

Before imposing a harsher sentence than that agreed upon, the court must offer defendant an opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea. Although the court could impose an enhanced sentence upon defendant’s arrest on new charges prior to sentencing, it could not impose an enhanced sentence higher than 5 to 15 years without providing defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea. Thus, we modify the judgment on appeal by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to Onondaga County Court to impose the sentence promised or to [1034]*1034afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea (see, People v Thomas, 210 AD2d 902; People v Scerbo, 197 AD2d 885, 886; People v Williams, 195 AD2d 1040, 1041). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.—Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and matter remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: In exchange for defendant’s plea of guilty to one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree in full satisfaction of a pending indictment, County Court agreed to impose a sentence of imprisonment of 1 to 3 years. The court warned defendant that, if he was arrested on new charges while on release pending sentencing, the court’s sentencing promise of 1 to 3 years would no longer stand and defendant could be sentenced to 5 to 15 years. Defendant agreed and his plea of guilty was accepted. While on release pending sentencing, defendant was arrested on a new charge of robbery in the first degree. The court satisfied itself that there was a basis for the arrest (see, People v Outley, 80 NY2d 702), and, after denying the request of defendant to withdraw his plea, sentenced defendant to 7 to 21 years.

Before imposing a harsher sentence than that agreed upon, the court must offer defendant an opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea. Although the court could impose an enhanced sentence upon defendant’s arrest on new charges prior to sentencing, it could not impose an enhanced sentence higher than 5 to 15 years without providing defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea. Thus, we modify the judgment on appeal by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to Onondaga County Court to impose the sentence promised or to [1034]*1034afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea (see, People v Thomas, 210 AD2d 902; People v Scerbo, 197 AD2d 885, 886; People v Williams, 195 AD2d 1040, 1041). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.—Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.D.2d 1033, 626 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sampson-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack