From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 4, 1991
170 A.D.2d 464 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

February 4, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for dismissal of Indictment Numbers 1677/88 and 1678/88.

After entering his plea of guilty in the instant matter, the defendant requested that he be released on his own recognizance for two weeks prior to sentencing. The court acceded to this request, informing him that should he fail to appear in court on the scheduled date, an increased sentence of 7 1/2 to 15 years imprisonment would be imposed in lieu of the bargained-for sentence of 3 to 6 years imprisonment. The defendant indicated that he understood the terms of this condition and he consented to it.

Having failed to return to court on the appointed date, the defendant was subsequently arrested on a bench warrant. Thereafter, at sentencing, the court imposed the promised increased sentence of 7 1/2 to 15 years imprisonment.

Since the defendant failed to fulfill a condition underlying the sentence agreement, namely, that he return to court at the conclusion of his two-week release, the court was no longer bound by its original sentence promise and had the right to impose a greater sentence upon the defendant's violation of the agreed-upon conditions (see, People v Warren, 121 A.D.2d 418; see also, People v Asencio, 143 A.D.2d 917, 918). Additionally, since the promise of an increased sentence was part of the original plea agreement, the defendant has no cause to complain that the sentence imposed is excessive (see, People v Winston, 114 A.D.2d 918; People v Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816, 817; see also, People v Perkins, 130 A.D.2d 521, 522).

Upon our review of the minutes of the plea proceedings, we find that the dismissal of Indictment Numbers 1677/88 and 1678/88 was part of the original plea bargain and that it was error for the court to fail to dismiss those indictments at sentencing. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for dismissal of those indictments. Mangano, P.J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 4, 1991
170 A.D.2d 464 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROGER MILLER, JR.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 4, 1991

Citations

170 A.D.2d 464 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
565 N.Y.S.2d 553

Citing Cases

People v. Felder

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed. As we have recently observed, "[i]t is well settled that where the…

People v. Weaver

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed. The defendant breached the unambiguous conditions of his plea…