From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Harris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 19, 2011
84 A.D.3d 1587 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 102620.

May 19, 2011.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Herrick, J.), rendered March 6, 2009, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of conspiracy in the second degree.

James P. Milstein, Public Defender, Albany (Theresa M. Suozzi of counsel), for appellant.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Steven M. Sharp of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Lahtinen, Malone Jr., Garry and Egan Jr., JJ.


In satisfaction of a three-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of conspiracy in the second degree and waived his right to appeal. Under the terms of the plea agreement, defendant was to be sentenced to a maximum of from 5 to 15 years and a minimum of 3 to 9 years in prison. County Court advised him that he could receive a sentence of between 81/3 to 25 years in prison if convicted after trial. Defendant was subsequently sentenced, in accordance with the plea agreement, to a prison term of 4 to 12 years. Defendant now appeals.

Defendant's sole contention is that the sentence is harsh and excessive. We are, however, precluded from addressing this claim by defendant's valid waiver of appeal ( see People v Spencer, 79 AD3d 1454; People v Phelan, 77 AD3d 987, 988, lv denied 16 NY3d 834). Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Harris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 19, 2011
84 A.D.3d 1587 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

People v. Harris

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TYSHAWN HARRIS, Also…

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

Date published: May 19, 2011

Citations

84 A.D.3d 1587 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 4115
922 N.Y.S.2d 820

Citing Cases

People v. Moron

Defendant's sole contention is that the sentence is harsh and excessive. We are, however, precluded from…

People v. Moron

Defendant's sole contention is that the sentence is harsh and excessive. We are, however, precluded from…