People v. Landy, 67 A.D.3d 1205 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Landy, 67 A.D.3d 1205 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Evans (nyappdiv, 2011-02-10)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Evans
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
In light of the fact that he received the bargained-for sentence, and considering the serious nature of the present offense where defendant admitted to cutting his girlfriend’s neck with a knife, we perceive no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances that would warrant the modification of his sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Landy, 67 AD3d 1205, 1205-1206 [2009]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Judware
N.Y. App. Div. · 2010 · confidence medium
Under all of the circumstances, and given defendant’s prior criminal history, we perceive the existence of no extraordinary circumstance or abuse of County Court’s discretion that would warrant modification or reduction of the sentence (see People v Landy, 67 AD3d 1205, 1205-1206 [2009]; People v Miles, 61 AD3d 1118, 1120 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 918 [2009]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Alphonse Landy
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 19, 2009.
67 A.D.3d 1205
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Hoye, J.), rendered April 21, 2008, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the first degree.

In satisfaction of a four-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to rape in the first degree. He was subsequently sentenced, in accordance with the plea agreement, to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.*

Defendant’s sole contention is that the sentence is harsh and excessive. Upon reviewing the record, we disagree. Defendant has a lengthy criminal record, has had several orders of protection issued against him prohibiting contact with various women and expressed no remorse for his conduct. Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion nor the existence of extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence—which is[*1206] within the permissible statutory range—in the interest of justice (see People v Wilson, 61 AD3d 1269, 1272-1273 [2009]; People v Kennard, 60 AD3d 1096, 1097 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 926 [2009]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Although the original plea offer included a waiver of the right to appeal, the record does not establish that defendant waived this right and the People concede this fact.