People v Ross
2007 NY Slip Op 08133 [45 AD3d 897]
November 1, 2007
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, January 16, 2008


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lucky A.Ross, Appellant.

[*1]Jaime C. Louridas, Schenectady, for appellant.

Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Benjamin K. Bergman of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J.), rendered August21, 2006, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal sale ofa controlled substance in the third degree.

In satisfaction of a three-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminalsale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced as agreed to two years inprison and three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

The sole argument advanced by defendant is that his sentence was harsh and excessive to theextent that it included a three-year period of postrelease supervision. We disagree. Noting thatdefendant obtained a favorable plea resolution, we find neither an abuse of discretion by CountyCourt nor the presence of any extraordinary circumstances justifying a modification of thebargained-for sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Gillespie, 19 AD3d 878 [2005]).

Spain, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgmentis affirmed.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.