From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Benedict

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 750 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

July 20, 2000.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main Jr., J.), rendered March 8, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Van Zwisohn, Clifton Park, for appellant.

Andrew G. Schrader, District Attorney (Andrew G. Benedict of counsel), Malone, for respondent.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Graffeo, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

The record indicates that a three-count indictment was returned by a Grand Jury in May 1993 charging defendant with driving while intoxicated, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree and speeding. Defendant failed to appear at the scheduled arraignment and a warrant for his arrest was issued. Thereafter, defendant, who had absconded to Canada, voluntarily contacted the District Attorney's office and arranged his surrender. Pursuant to a negotiated plea bargain, defendant ultimately pleaded guilty to a single count of driving while intoxicated in satisfaction of the indictment and in exchange for a commitment from the People not to pursue a charge of bail jumping. Defendant was sentenced to five years' probation, 45 days in jail and a $2,500 fine. His sole argument on appeal is that this sentence was harsh and excessive, a contention we cannot endorse.

A sentence within permissible statutory ranges will not be disturbed unless the sentencing court abused its discretion or extraordinary circumstances exist warranting a modification (see,People v. Dolphy, 257 A.D.2d 681, 685, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 872). Here, while defendant's actions in voluntarily turning himself in and pursuing alcohol treatment are commendable, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court which, we note, was consistent with the recommendation of the Probation Department and justified by the facts herein.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Benedict

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 20, 2000
274 A.D.2d 750 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

People v. Benedict

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTONWA I. BENEDICT…

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

Date published: Jul 20, 2000

Citations

274 A.D.2d 750 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
712 N.Y.S.2d 68

Citing Cases

People v. Washington

Turning to the sentence, we find that County Court considered all relevant factors. As the record reveals no…

People v. Rorris

The testimony of an auto body technician, who inspected the vehicle four months after the stop, that its…