From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rush

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 2, 1989
155 A.D.2d 241 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

November 2, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.).


We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction", we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence (People v Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 305).

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms" (People v Felman, 141 A.D.2d 889, 890, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 918).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ross, Milonas, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Rush

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 2, 1989
155 A.D.2d 241 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Rush

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHNNY RUSH, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 2, 1989

Citations

155 A.D.2d 241 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Citing Cases

People v. Rada

Moreover, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines and,…

People v. Castro

Further, his sentence was the result of a negotiated plea agreement. "`Having received the benefit of his…