Opinion
No. 2018-03757 Ind. No. 1044/16
06-08-2022
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Freddrick Canty, appellant.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY, for appellant. Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Ellen C. Abbot of counsel; Jordan Miller on the memorandum), for respondent.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY, for appellant.
Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Ellen C. Abbot of counsel; Jordan Miller on the memorandum), for respondent.
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P. REINALDO E. RIVERA ROBERT J. MILLER WILLIAM G. FORD, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Stephanie Zaro, J.), imposed February 13, 2018, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in imposing a sentence greater than what had been promised based upon the defendant's violation of a condition of his plea agreement that he return to court for sentencing (see People v Scarlett, 176 A.D.3d 1111, 1112; People v Pereyra, 169 A.D.3d 719, 719; People v Smith, 160 A.D.3d 664, 665). "Even though the court had a right to enhance the sentence, [this Court has] broad, plenary power to modify an enhanced sentence that is harsh or excessive under the circumstances" (People v Diaz, 146 A.D.3d 803, 805). The enhanced sentence imposed was not harsh or excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
CONNOLLY, J.P., RIVERA, MILLER and FORD, JJ., concur.