From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rooks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 18, 1999
262 A.D.2d 1073 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

June 18, 1999

Appeal from Judgment of Wayne County Court, Sirkin, J. — Attempted Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.

PRESENT: LAWTON, J. P., HAYES, WISNER, HURLBUTT AND SCUDDER, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court did not abuse its discretion in failing to impose the sentence promised at the time of defendant's guilty plea. "County Court sufficiently demonstrated in the record that proper sentencing criteria counseled imposition of a different sanction than that agreed to originally" (People v. Schultz, 73 N.Y.2d 757, 758). Defendant did not change his position in reliance upon the plea bargain, and defendant was given the opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea. We reject the contention that defendant was entitled to specific performance of the plea bargain because the prosecutor threatened to seek a superseding indictment if defendant withdrew his guilty plea. We conclude that, given defendant's extensive criminal record, the sentence imposed is neither unduly harsh nor severe.


Summaries of

People v. Rooks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 18, 1999
262 A.D.2d 1073 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Rooks

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. TERRANCE G…

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

Date published: Jun 18, 1999

Citations

262 A.D.2d 1073 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
691 N.Y.S.2d 816

Citing Cases

People v. Langworthy

We reject the contention of defendant that he is entitled to specific performance of the plea agreement.…