Opinion
2022–01254 S.C.I. No. 144/21
10-12-2022
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Richard G. KELLY, appellant.
Anthony DeFazio Law, P.C., Beacon, NY, for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Anthony DeFazio Law, P.C., Beacon, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P., ANGELA G. IANNACCI, PAUL WOOTEN, LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Dutchess County (Jessica Segal, J.), imposed February 10, 2022, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was illegal or, alternatively, excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the sentence was not imposed on the basis of materially untrue assumptions or misinformation (see People v. Naranjo, 89 N.Y.2d 1047, 1049, 659 N.Y.S.2d 826, 681 N.E.2d 1272 ; People v. Slater, 147 A.D.3d 981, 46 N.Y.S.3d 807 ; People v. Miller, 119 A.D.3d 613, 987 N.Y.S.2d 881 ). Indeed, the defendant admitted to the challenged facts in treatment records, which were submitted by him to the sentencing court. The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).
CONNOLLY, J.P., IANNACCI, WOOTEN and WAN, JJ., concur.