From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mercado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 19, 1996
226 A.D.2d 1125 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 19, 1996

Appeal from the Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Fallon, Wesley, Davis and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously modified as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and as modified affirmed in accordance with the following Memorandum: We reject the contention that defendant's conviction of assault in the first degree following a jury trial is based upon legally insufficient evidence ( see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).

"`It is well settled that a defendant has no absolute right to have [her] plea accepted by the court and that the decision whether to accept a reduced plea is a matter within the court's discretion'" ( People v. Williams, 158 A.D.2d 930, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 971, quoting People v. Manley, 103 A.D.2d 1024). Nevertheless, we are constrained to express our strong disapproval of the manner in which County Court conducted itself during defendant's attempt to plead to a reduced charge.

Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh. We, therefore, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, reduce defendant's sentence to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 2 to 6 years ( see, CPL 470.15 [b]).


Summaries of

People v. Mercado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 19, 1996
226 A.D.2d 1125 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Mercado

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TARA MERCADO, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 19, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 1125 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 135

Citing Cases

People v. Burnice

In any event, we conclude that defendant's challenge to the negotiated sentence as unduly harsh and severe is…