From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Murdock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 14, 1995
219 A.D.2d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

September 14, 1995

Appeal from the County Court of Essex County (Main, Jr., J.).


Defendant, a former attorney, pleaded guilty to two counts of grand larceny in the second degree in satisfaction of a superior court information charging him with stealing client funds. He was sentenced to consecutive terms of 5 to 15 years in prison on each count. Defendant contends that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive. We agree to the extent that, in the exercise of our discretion and in the interest of justice, we find that the sentences should run concurrently ( see, People v Suhalla, 97 A.D.2d 857; People v Pettis, 62 A.D.2d 1110).

Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by directing that the sentences imposed upon defendant be concurrent sentences, and, as so modified, affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Murdock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 14, 1995
219 A.D.2d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Murdock

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES R. MURDOCK, JR.…

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

Date published: Sep 14, 1995

Citations

219 A.D.2d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
631 N.Y.S.2d 198

Citing Cases

People v. Tesar

Circumstances that merit consideration with regard to defendant's claim that her sentence is harsh and…

People v. Robinson

Of the various contentions advanced on appeal, we find merit in only one, i.e., that the sentence imposed by…