| People v Thompson |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 09414 [79 AD3d 1457] |
| December 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard W.Thompson, Appellant. |
—[*1] Beth G. Cozzolino, District Attorney, Hudson (H. Neal Conolly of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Columbia County (Czajka, J.), rendered July 8,2009, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated (two counts).
Defendant was charged in an indictment with two counts of driving while intoxicated after hesustained injuries in a one-car accident that occurred when he lost control of his vehicle and went offthe road. He pleaded guilty to the charges and waived his right to appeal. No promises were made withrespect to sentencing, but both the District Attorney and defense counsel jointly recommended thatdefendant serve a five-year term of probation. County Court, however, refused to adopt the jointsentencing recommendation and sentenced defendant to concurrent prison terms of 1 to 2 years and 1to 3 years. The court further advised defendant that, because it had varied from the joint sentencingrecommendation, defendant could appeal that issue. Defendant appeals.
Defendant argues that the sentence is harsh and excessive, particularly considering hisremorsefulness and his willingness to participate in treatment programs. We disagree. Initially, we notethat County Court was not bound to follow the joint sentencing recommendation as it did not make acommitment to do so and, during the plea proceedings, advised defendant that he could receive up tofour years in prison (see People vWatson, 61 AD3d 1217, 1219 [2009], lv [*2]denied12 NY3d 930 [2009]; People v Nichols, 272 AD2d 641 [2000]). County Court actuallyimposed a lesser term of imprisonment having an aggregate of 1 to 3 years. "[I]t is well settled that asentence within the statutory parameters will not be disturbed absent extraordinary circumstanceswarranting modification" (People v Jones, 286 AD2d 785, 786 [2001]; see People vNichols, 272 AD2d at 641). Here, the sentence was well within the statutory guidelines for a classE felony (see Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [e]; [3] [b]). Moreover, in sentencing him to a termof incarceration, County Court considered defendant's lengthy criminal record, which included prioralcohol-related convictions, as well as the fact that he was on probation at the time of the incident inquestion. Consequently, we do not find that extraordinary circumstances exist warranting modificationof the sentence or that County Court abused its discretion (see People v Hope, 274 AD2d673, 674 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 890 [2000]).
Peters, J.P., Rose, Malone Jr., McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.