From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 13, 2001
286 A.D.2d 789 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Decided and Entered: September 13, 2001.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main Jr., J.), rendered March 20, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of sodomy in the first degree.

Michael C. Ross, Bloomingburg, for appellant.

Andrew G. Schrader, District Attorney, Malone, for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and, Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Defendant waived indictment and thereafter pleaded guilty to the crime of sodomy in the first degree in full satisfaction of a seven-count superior court information against him. The charges stemmed from various sexual acts perpetrated against defendant's step-daughter beginning when she was less than six years old and continuing until she was nine years old. Notwithstanding the joint recommendation of the People and the defense attorney that defendant receive a prison sentence of 6 to 12 years, County Court imposed a sentence of 10 to 20 years in prison. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Initially, we reject defendant's contention that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive. It is well settled that a sentence within the statutory parameters will not be disturbed absent extraordinary circumstances warranting modification (see, People v. Dolphy, 257 A.D.2d 681, 685, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 872). Notwithstanding the alleged mitigating circumstances advanced by defendant, we cannot conclude that the sentence was harsh and excessive in view of his admitted victimization of a very young child for his own sexual gratification (see, People v. Gorga, 268 A.D.2d 614; People v. David, 263 A.D.2d 615).

Likewise, we reject defendant's argument that County Court erred by failing to give him an opportunity to withdraw his plea when it determined not to impose the sentence which was jointly recommended by the People and defendant's attorney. The record demonstrates that, prior to accepting defendant's plea, County Court clearly indicated to defendant that it had made no commitment regarding defendant's sentence and specifically advised him of the range of permissible sentences that could be imposed. Accordingly, County Court was under no obligation to give defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea before imposing a more severe sentence than that which had been recommended (see, People v. Rhodes, 251 A.D.2d 906, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 929; People v. Hartford, 217 A.D.2d 798).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Gero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 13, 2001
286 A.D.2d 789 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Gero

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RAYMOND GERO, Appellant

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

Date published: Sep 13, 2001

Citations

286 A.D.2d 789 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
729 N.Y.S.2d 805

Citing Cases

People v. Schwartz

Defendant was then sentenced to two years in prison with three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant's…

People v. Nickel

He further professed his philosophical view that pedophilia is an "acceptable expression of God's will for…