Opinion
November 7, 1991
Appeal from the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.).
We reject defendant's contention that the prison sentence he received of 3 to 6 years as a second felony offender was harsh and excessive. His plea of guilty was in satisfaction of a two-count indictment and was made with the understanding that the People would not pursue persistent felony offender status or persistent violent felony offender status. Additionally, at the time of the plea, the People recommended that a sentence of 3 1/2 to 7 years, the harshest sentence possible, be imposed (see, Penal Law § 70.04 [c]; [4]) and in fact County Court imposed a more lenient sentence. Under these circumstances, we find no abuse of discretion by the court in imposing sentence (see, People v. Mackey, 136 A.D.2d 780, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 899). With respect to his claim that he was subjected to double jeopardy, this court has specifically determined that institutional disciplinary proceedings which result in the loss of an inmate's privileges or good time may not form the basis for a claim of double jeopardy for criminal charges based on the same acts which were the basis for the disciplinary charges (see, People v Briggs, 108 A.D.2d 1058). The same result should obtain here.
Casey, J.P., Weiss, Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.