From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Capone

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 19, 2018
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 2684 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

109051 109052

04-19-2018

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Aaron T. CAPONE, Appellant.

Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Cynthia Feathers of counsel), for appellant. Gary M. Pasqua, District Attorney, Canton (Matthew L. Peabody of counsel), for respondent.


Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Cynthia Feathers of counsel), for appellant.

Gary M. Pasqua, District Attorney, Canton (Matthew L. Peabody of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Lynch, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDERAppeals (1) from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), rendered August 17, 2015, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of aggravated driving while intoxicated, and (2) from a judgment of said court (Champagne, J.), rendered October 11, 2016, which revoked defendant's probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

Defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated driving while intoxicated and waived his right to appeal. After successfully completing a period of interim probation, County Court (Richards, J.) sentenced defendant to five years of probation. Thereafter, defendant admitted to violating a condition of his probation by consuming alcohol. County Court (Champagne, J.) then revoked defendant's probation and resentenced him to 1 to 3 years in prison followed by three years of conditional discharge. Defendant appeals from both judgments.

Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the negotiated resentence was harsh and excessive. We disagree. Given defendant's acknowledgment that he repeatedly consumed alcohol while on probation, his lengthy criminal history and that the agreed-upon sentence was the statutory minimum prison term (see Penal Law § 70.00[2][e] ; [3][b] ), we find no extraordinary circumstances or any abuse of discretion warranting a reduction of the resentence in the interest of justice (see People v. Woodruff, 136 A.D.3d 1073, 1074, 25 N.Y.S.3d 383 [2016] ; People v. Brand, 100 A.D.3d 1154, 1154, 953 N.Y.S.2d 726 [2012] ).

Defendant's original waiver of the right to appeal does not preclude his challenge to the resentence (see

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Lynch, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ., concur.

People v. Middlemiss, 149 A.D.3d 1421, 1422 n.1, 52 N.Y.S.3d 584 [2017] ).


Summaries of

People v. Capone

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 19, 2018
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 2684 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

People v. Capone

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Aaron T. CAPONE…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 19, 2018

Citations

2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 2684 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
71 N.Y.S.3d 912

Citing Cases

People v. Montpetit

Defendant now appeals, contending only that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive.Although…

People v. Regan

Defendant's sole argument upon appeal is that the negotiated resentence imposed was harsh and excessive. We…