From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 7, 2005
17 A.D.3d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

15366.

April 7, 2005.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Madison County (DiStefano, J.), rendered January 5, 2004, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crimes of grand larceny in the fourth degree and forgery in the second degree.

David M. Giglio, Utica, for appellant.

Donald F. Cerio Jr., District Attorney, Wampsville, for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.


Defendant was charged in a six-count indictment with multiple counts of larceny and forgery arising from her fraudulent use of a credit card and checks belonging to a resident of the adult care facility where she worked. She pleaded guilty to grand larceny in the fourth degree and forgery in the second degree in full satisfaction of the indictment. No specific sentence was promised as part of the plea agreement, although County Court agreed that the sentences would be concurrent and would not exceed 1 to 3 years in prison. Defendant was also required to pay restitution. At sentencing, County Court imposed concurrent prison terms of 1 to 3 years. Defendant now appeals.

Notwithstanding the lesser sentence recommended by the presentence report which was adopted by the prosecution and defense counsel, County Court was not bound to impose this sentence. Rather, County Court retained discretion with respect to sentencing ( see People v. Rawdon, 296 AD2d 599, 599, lv denied 98 NY2d 771) and the only limitation made a part of the plea agreement was that the prison terms run concurrently and not exceed 1 to 3 years. After considering the reprehensible nature of defendant's crimes, involving the exploitation of the elderly, County Court was justified in imposing concurrent 1 to 3-year prison terms. Inasmuch as we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence, we decline to disturb the judgment of conviction ( see People v. Jones, 11 AD3d 818; People v. Morrison, 290 AD2d 808, 810, lv denied 98 NY2d 653).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Mills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 7, 2005
17 A.D.3d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

People v. Mills

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CRYSTAL A. MILLS…

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

Date published: Apr 7, 2005

Citations

17 A.D.3d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
793 N.Y.S.2d 228

Citing Cases

State v. Clark

Defendant now appeals, arguing that his sentence was improperly exacerbated based upon a factual misstatement…

People v. Watson

Likewise, we find no merit to defendant's claim that his sentence is harsh and excessive. County Court was…