From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Daniel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 1986
123 A.D.2d 782 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

October 20, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McInerney, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and this case is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

We reject the defendant's characterization of the sentencing court's comments as indicating that the court failed to exercise its discretion when imposing sentence (see, People v Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302; People v Thompson, 60 N.Y.2d 513). The court acknowledged at the time of the defendant's guilty plea that it was not bound by the prosecutor's recommendation, and further exercised its discretion by granting youthful offender status to the defendant. The court did not indicate that it considered itself bound by the prosecutor's recommendations in any way (see, People v Farrar, supra; People v Carpino, 96 A.D.2d 489). Rather, the court merely expressed the correct proposition that the defendant was bound by his agreement (see, People v Cates, 104 A.D.2d 895, 896). Furthermore, we do not find the sentence excessive and decline to exercise interest of justice jurisdiction. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Daniel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 1986
123 A.D.2d 782 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Daniel

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DANIEL D., Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1986

Citations

123 A.D.2d 782 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)