People v. MillsPeople v. Mills
Notwithstanding the lesser sentence recommended by the presentence report which was adopted by the prosecution and defense counsel, County Court was not bound to impose this sentence. Rather, County Court retained discretion with respect to sentencing (see People v Rawdon, 296 AD2d 599, 599 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 771 [2002]) and the only limitation made a part of the plea agreement was that the prison terms run concurrently and not exceed 1 to 3 years. After considering the reprehensible nature of defendant‘s crimes, involving the exploitation of the elderly, County Court was justified in imposing concurrent 1 to 3-year prison terms. Inasmuch as we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence, we decline to disturb the judgment of conviction (see People v Jones, 11 AD3d 818 [2004]; People v Morrison, 290 AD2d 808, 810 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 653 [2002]).
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.