People v. Ward

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ward

180 A.D.2d 860, 580 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1180

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 180 A.D.2d 860 (People v. Ward) 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. Ward, 180 A.D.2d 860, 580 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1180 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered June 3, 1991, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of unlawful imprisonment in the first degree.

We reject defendant’s contention that the sentence he received was harsh and excessive. At the time of his plea he was specifically informed, and he acknowledged, that no promises were made as to his sentence or on the question of youthful offender status. While he could have received a prison term of lVá to 4 years (Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [e]; [3] [b]), County Court instead imposed a definite term of one year in jail (Penal Law § 70.00 [4]). Under the circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion in imposing sentence (see, People v Henao, 149 AD2d 531). Likewise, based on the record before us, we find no abuse of discretion by the court in not according defendant youthful offender status (see, People v Johnson, 92 AD2d 672). Defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Mahoney, 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 St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered June 3, 1991, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of unlawful imprisonment in the first degree.

We reject defendant’s contention that the sentence he received was harsh and excessive. At the time of his plea he was specifically informed, and he acknowledged, that no promises were made as to his sentence or on the question of youthful offender status. While he could have received a prison term of lVá to 4 years (Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [e]; [3] [b]), County Court instead imposed a definite term of one year in jail (Penal Law § 70.00 [4]). Under the circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion in imposing sentence (see, People v Henao, 149 AD2d 531). Likewise, based on the record before us, we find no abuse of discretion by the court in not according defendant youthful offender status (see, People v Johnson, 92 AD2d 672). Defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 A.D.2d 860, 580 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ward-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack