People v. Winston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Winston

114 A.D.2d 918, 494 N.Y.S.2d 1012, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53959

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 114 A.D.2d 918 (People v. Winston) 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. Winston, 114 A.D.2d 918, 494 N.Y.S.2d 1012, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53959 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Balbach, J.), both rendered November 3, 1983, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under indictment No. 8208/82 and attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under indictment No. 8230/82, upon his pleas of guilty, and sentencing him as a second felony offender to concurrent indeterminate terms of l½ to 3 years’ imprisonment.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant contends that the concurrent sentences of IV2 to 3 years were excessive under the circumstances. However, the terms imposed were the minimum permitted by statute (Penal Law § 70.06 [3] [e]; [4] [b]). In addition, since the sentence was in accordance with a negotiated plea agreed to by defendant, he could not, in any event, claim it to be excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Balbach, J.), both rendered November 3, 1983, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under indictment No. 8208/82 and attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under indictment No. 8230/82, upon his pleas of guilty, and sentencing him as a second felony offender to concurrent indeterminate terms of l½ to 3 years’ imprisonment.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant contends that the concurrent sentences of IV2 to 3 years were excessive under the circumstances. However, the terms imposed were the minimum permitted by statute (Penal Law § 70.06 [3] [e]; [4] [b]). In addition, since the sentence was in accordance with a negotiated plea agreed to by defendant, he could not, in any event, claim it to be excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.2d 918, 494 N.Y.S.2d 1012, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-winston-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack