Opinion
May 7, 1992
Appeal from the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.).
We find nothing in the record before us to support defendant's contention that County Court abused its discretion in denying him youthful offender treatment (see, People v. Williams, 78 A.D.2d 642). In reaching this conclusion, we cite the nature of the crime involved and the fact that defendant had previously been adjudged to be a youthful offender on an unrelated matter (see, People v. Jackson, 56 A.D.2d 969). In addition, he was on probation for the prior matter when the incident upon which he entered his plea took place. We also reject defendant's contention that the prison sentence he received of 1 to 3 years was harsh and excessive. The sentence was within the statutory guidelines and in accordance with the plea agreement, and another pending charge was dropped (see, People v. Pearson, 133 A.D.2d 951).
Mikoll, J.P., Levine, Crew III, Casey and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.