From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Dearmyer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 14, 2013
107 A.D.3d 1590 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-06-14

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Terrence M. DEARMYER, Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Deborah A. Haendiges, J.), rendered May 2, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree. The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Kristin M. Preve of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Donna A. Milling of Counsel), for Respondent.


Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Deborah A. Haendiges, J.), rendered May 2, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Kristin M. Preve of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Donna A. Milling of Counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:

On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2] ), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is unenforceable and that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. As the People correctly concede, defendant's waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence because his purported waiver of the right to appeal occurred before Supreme Court advised him of the maximum sentence he could receive ( see People v. Monaghan, 101 A.D.3d 1686, 1686, 956 N.Y.S.2d 764;People v. Farrell, 71 A.D.3d 1507, 1507, 897 N.Y.S.2d 357,lv. denied 15 N.Y.3d 804, 908 N.Y.S.2d 164, 934 N.E.2d 898). Nevertheless, we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Although defendant faced a maximum sentence of seven years' imprisonment ( seePenal Law 70.06[6][c] ), the court sentenced him to 4 1/2 years' imprisonment, which was only 1 1/2 years more than the minimum sentence permitted by law. We note that, according to the presentence investigation report, defendant “failed to take any responsibility for the present offense and showed no remorse” for the injuries he inflicted upon the victim. We also note that defendant had been sentenced to probation on a prior felony conviction, but violated the conditions of probation and was resentenced to a term of incarceration. Under the circumstances, we perceive no basis for modifying defendant's sentence as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( seeCPL 470.15[6][b] ).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, CARNI, and LINDLEY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Dearmyer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jun 14, 2013
107 A.D.3d 1590 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Dearmyer

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Terrence M. DEARMYER…

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

Date published: Jun 14, 2013

Citations

107 A.D.3d 1590 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 4513
966 N.Y.S.2d 738