From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Domin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 7, 2002
291 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

11852

February 7, 2002.

Motion for reconsideration.


Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted and, upon reconsideration, the decision and order dated and entered June 21, 2001 is amended by adding a final paragraph as follows: "It appears from the record on appeal that at the time of his plea, defendant was promised a sentence on his conviction of DWI as a D felony of a minimum term of 1½ years and a maximum term of 4 years even though the minimum sentence may not be more than one-third the maximum. However, he was sentenced on that conviction to 1½ to 4½ years' imprisonment. While the agreed-upon sentence could not have been properly imposed, we are of the view that since the maximum term of the sentence imposed on defendant's conviction of DWI as a D felony exceeded the agreed-upon maximum, the sentence should be modified to a term of 1 1/3 to 4 years."

In addition, the ordering paragraph of the decision and order is amended by substituting the following:

"ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating that portion of the sentence which imposed mandatory minimum fines upon defendant; matter remitted to the County Court of Ulster County for resentencing; and the sentence on defendant's conviction of DWI as a D felony is modified by reducing the sentence imposed to a concurrent indeterminate term of 1 1/3 to 4 years' imprisonment; and, as so modified, affirmed."

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Domin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 7, 2002
291 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Domin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. STEVEN DOMIN, Appellant

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

Date published: Feb 7, 2002

Citations

291 A.D.2d 580 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
736 N.Y.S.2d 921

Citing Cases

People v. Olmstead

e fine as “mandatory” during the plea colloquy and there is no indication that it understood otherwise when…

People v. Duquette

Defendant contends, and the People concede, that County Court's use of the phrase “mandatory” in imposing the…