From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Langlois

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 9, 1997
243 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

October 9, 1997

Appeal from County Court, Franklin County (Main, Jr., J.).


Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree and was sentenced to 180 days in jail and five years' probation. Defendant was subsequently charged with and admitted to violating several terms of his probation whereupon County Court revoked his probation and resentenced him to two consecutive prison terms of 2 to 6 years. Defendant now argues that the sentence was harsh and excessive due to the consecutive nature of the prison terms. We disagree. After revoking defendant's probation, County Court imposed a term of imprisonment that was appropriate for each crime to which defendant pleaded guilty ( see, CPL 410.70; People v. Pickett, 189 A.D.2d 913). Because each crime was a separate and distinct act, imposition of consecutive prison terms by County Court was authorized ( see, Penal Law § 70.25). Given defendant's demonstrated inability to abide by the terms of his probation, his extensive prior involvement with the justice system and the absence of extraordinary circumstances warranting our intervention, we find no reason to disturb the sentence. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Langlois

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 9, 1997
243 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Langlois

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. STEPHEN M. LANGLOIS…

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

Date published: Oct 9, 1997

Citations

243 A.D.2d 775 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
662 N.Y.S.2d 936

Citing Cases

People v. Rowland

Upon reviewing the record, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a…

People v. Marshall

Our review of the record discloses that County Court providently exercised its discretion in revoking…