From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 1, 2007
45 A.D.3d 897 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 100600.

November 1, 2007.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J.), rendered August 21, 2006, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Jaime C. Louridas, Schenectady, for appellant.

Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Benjamin K. Bergman of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Spain, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.


In satisfaction of a three-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced as agreed to two years in prison and three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

The sole argument advanced by defendant is that his sentence was harsh and excessive to the extent that it included a three year period of postrelease supervision. We disagree. Noting that defendant obtained a favorable plea resolution, we find neither an abuse of discretion by County Court nor the presence of any extraordinary circumstances justifying a modification of the bargained-for sentence in the interest of justice ( see People v Gillespie, 19 AD3d 878).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Ross

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 1, 2007
45 A.D.3d 897 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

People v. Ross

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LUCKY A. ROSS…

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

Date published: Nov 1, 2007

Citations

45 A.D.3d 897 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 8133
844 N.Y.S.2d 496

Citing Cases

People v. Ruise

Defendant appeals, contending that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive, particularly given his…

People v. Lussier

Defendant now appeals, arguing solely that the agreed-upon sentence was harsh and excessive. Noting the…