Opinion
February 5, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (George F. Roberts, J.).
We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction", we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. (People v Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 305.)
Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms." (People v Felman, 141 A.D.2d 889, 890, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 918.)
The record reveals no confusion by the court concerning the minimum permissible sentence. It is plain from the context that the court's statement "one and a third is the minimum" referred to the minimum term of the sentence imposed, not to the minimum term permitted by statute.
Concur — Milonas, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Smith, JJ.