Opinion
242 A.D.2d 931 662 N.Y.S.2d 344 PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Fred ADKINS, Appellant. 1997-07909 Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department September 30, 1997.
Gerald T. Barth by Philip Rothschild, Syracuse, for Appellant.
William J. Fitzpatrick by James Maxwell, Syracuse, for Respondent.
Before GREEN, J.P., and PINE, DOERR, BALIO and FALLON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant entered a plea of guilty to forgery in the second degree on the condition that he would receive an indeterminate sentence of incarceration of 2 to 4 years and that the sentence would run concurrently with a sentence of 17 1/2 years to life that he received on a prior conviction of forgery in the second degree and petit larceny. On February 7, 1997, we modified the prior judgment of conviction by reversing the forgery conviction and dismissing that count of the indictment (People v. Adkins, 236 A.D.2d 850, 653 N.Y.S.2d 1007, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 854, 661 N.Y.S.2d 181, 683 N.E.2d 1055). Because defendant's plea was induced by the promise of a concurrent sentence, the judgment must be reversed and the matter remitted to Onondaga County Court to give defendant an opportunity to withdraw the plea (see, People v. Taylor, 80 N.Y.2d 1, 15, 586 N.Y.S.2d 545, 598 N.E.2d 693; People v. Fuggazzatto, 62 N.Y.2d 862, 863, 477 N.Y.S.2d 619, 466 N.E.2d 159; People v. Gaskins, 171 A.D.2d 272, 281, 575 N.Y.S.2d 564). In light of our determination, we do not reach the argument that the plea was coerced by the court's threat of a more severe sentence should defendant proceed to trial. We have examined the remaining argument raised by defendant and conclude that it is without merit.
Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, plea vacated and matter remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings.