From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Grant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 5, 1991
178 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

December 5, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Delaware County (Mugglin, J.).


We agree that Supreme Court erred in ordering defendant to pay a surcharge of $105 upon his conviction of driving while intoxicated. Penal Law § 60.35 (1), which was the statute to which the court was apparently referring, expressly exempts from its coverage crimes occurring under the Vehicle and Traffic Law. Instead, the applicable statute is Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1809 (1), which imposes a $25 surcharge. The sum of the surcharge should therefore be reduced accordingly. We do not agree, however, with defendant's assertion that the surcharge should have been waived (see, CPL 420.35). Nor do we agree with defendant's claim that the prison sentence he received of 1 to 3 years was harsh and excessive. It was within the statutory guidelines and was part of the plea bargain. Furthermore, another charge was dropped as a result of the plea. Under these circumstances and given defendant's criminal background, we find no abuse of discretion by the court in imposing sentence (see, People v Miller, 163 A.D.2d 627, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 942; People v Wellington, 151 A.D.2d 796, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 853).

Casey, J.P., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reducing the mandatory surcharge to $25, and, as so modified, affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Grant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 5, 1991
178 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Grant

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PAUL M. GRANT…

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

Date published: Dec 5, 1991

Citations

178 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
577 N.Y.S.2d 162

Citing Cases

People v. Mooney

Defendant's argument, however, is grounded upon a flawed factual premise and an inapplicable statute. Penal…