People v. Van Nordstrand

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Van Nordstrand

238 A.D.2d 634, 655 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3170

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

DecidedApril 3, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 238 A.D.2d 634 (People v. Van Nordstrand) 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. Van Nordstrand, 238 A.D.2d 634, 655 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3170 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeál from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Scarano, Jr., J.), rendered January 31, 1996, convicting defen[635]*635dant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.

In full satisfaction of a five-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and was sentenced, as a predicate felon, to a prison term of seven years to life. Defendant contends that his sentence is harsh and excessive given the fact that he, inter alia, has a son and a disabled wife, has a history of steady employment and has had success in drug treatment. In light of defendant’s past criminal history, which includes a drug-related conviction, as well as the fact that defendant received the agreed-upon sentence which is within the statutory limits, we reject defendant’s contention and find that the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Roldan, 223 AD2d 893, lv denied 88 NY2d 993; People v Martinez, 184 AD2d 869, lv denied 80 NY2d 906). .

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

—Appeál from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Scarano, Jr., J.), rendered January 31, 1996, convicting defen[635]*635dant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.

In full satisfaction of a five-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and was sentenced, as a predicate felon, to a prison term of seven years to life. Defendant contends that his sentence is harsh and excessive given the fact that he, inter alia, has a son and a disabled wife, has a history of steady employment and has had success in drug treatment. In light of defendant’s past criminal history, which includes a drug-related conviction, as well as the fact that defendant received the agreed-upon sentence which is within the statutory limits, we reject defendant’s contention and find that the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Roldan, 223 AD2d 893, lv denied 88 NY2d 993; People v Martinez, 184 AD2d 869, lv denied 80 NY2d 906). .

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 634, 655 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-van-nordstrand-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack