From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Fritts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 28, 1991
170 A.D.2d 889 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

February 28, 1991

Appeal from the County Court of Ulster County (Vogt, J.).


Defendant claims that the 5- to 15-year prison sentence he received upon his plea of guilty was harsh and excessive and should be reduced in the interest of justice. Defendant entered his plea knowing that he would receive the sentence ultimately imposed by County Court, and two other charges were dropped as a result of the plea agreement. Under such circumstances, we reject defendant's claim that the sentence he bargained for should be disturbed (see, People v Mackey, 136 A.D.2d 780, 781, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 899; People v Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816, 817). Defendant also claims that he had inadequate legal representation in that defense counsel did not adequately communicate to him during each stage of the action. Significantly, defendant stated at two separate times during his plea that he was satisfied with his attorney and had ample time to discuss the matter with him. It therefore cannot be said that defense counsel failed to meet the standards enunciated in People v Baldi ( 54 N.Y.2d 137) (see, People v Mayes, 133 A.D.2d 905, 906).

Judgment and order affirmed. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Fritts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 28, 1991
170 A.D.2d 889 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Fritts

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ARTHUR FRITTS…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 1991

Citations

170 A.D.2d 889 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
567 N.Y.S.2d 182