People v. JordanPeople v. Jordan
In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of assault in the second degree and, in conjunction therewith, was to receive a sentence of time served. County Court advised defendant, however, that if he were arrested for any reason prior to the scheduled sentencing date, the court no longer would be bound by the sentencing commitment. Thereafter, while on release pending sentencing, defendant was arrested on unrelated charges and, following a jury trial, was convicted of burglary in the second degree and menacing in the second degree. Defendant subsequently ap
Defendant‘s sole contention upon appeal is that the enhanced sentence was harsh and excessive and should be reduced in the interest of justice. We disagree. Although defendant‘s prior criminal history was not extensive, the underlying assault conviction involved a serious act of violence, and County Court clearly warned defendant that his failure to abide by the no-arrest restriction could result in a greater sentence. “In view of defendant‘s disregard of this condition, coupled with the fact that the enhanced sentence was less than the statutory maximum, we find no extraordinary circumstances justifying a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice” (People v Douglas, 2 AD3d 1050, 1051 [2003], lv denied 2 NY3d 761 [2004] [citation omitted]; see People v White, 24 AD3d 817, 817 [2005]). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Rose, J.P., Spain and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.