Summary
rejecting government's assertion that waiver of appeal entered by defendant in connection with original plea of guilty precluded him from challenging severity of his resentence
Summary of this case from People v. CamachoOpinion
No. 100574.
September 20, 2007.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), rendered March 17, 2006, which revoked defendant's probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
Richard V. Manning, Parishville, for appellant.
Nicole M. Duve, District Attorney, Canton (Laurie L. Paro of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Crew III J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ.
In 2005, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted rape in the second degree and was sentenced to six months in jail as well as 10 years of probation. He was subsequently charged with violating various terms of his probation. After admitting to the violations, defendant's probation was revoked and he was resentenced to 1¼ to 3¾ years in prison. Defendant now appeals, contending that his resentence is harsh and excessive.
We preliminarily note that, contrary to the People's assertion, the waiver of appeal entered by defendant in connection with his original plea of guilty to attempted rape in the second degree does not preclude him from challenging the severity of his resentence ( see People v Rowland, 11 AD3d 825, 825). That said, acknowledging the seriousness of the underlying crime and defendant's proven failure to abide by his probation conditions, we discern neither an abuse of discretion by County Court nor the existence of any extraordinary circumstances justifying a reduction of the resentence in the interest of justice ( see People v Osborne, 38 AD3d 1132, 1132-1133, lv denied 9 NY3d 849). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.