| People v Philpot |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07134 [99 AD3d 1025] |
| October 24, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v LarryPhilpot, Appellant. |
—[*1] William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Joan H. McCarthy of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Greller, J.),rendered October 11, 2011, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or nearschool grounds (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the County Court adhered to the terms and conditionsof the plea agreement. An objective reading of the plea agreement demonstrates that its termswere complied with, and the defendant's misinterpretation of the agreement, or hisdisappointment with his sentence, does not suffice as a reason for vacating his plea of guilty(see People v Cataldo, 39 NY2d 578, 579-580 [1976]; People v Rodriguez, 98 AD3d 693[2012]; People v Hulsey, 244 AD2d 358, 359 [1997]; People v Martin, 235AD2d 551 [1997]; People v Davis, 161 AD2d 787, 788 [1990]; People v Welch,129 AD2d 752 [1987]).
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel iswithout merit. His argument that, at sentencing, his attorney "did little" to attempt to obtain asentence less than the one actually imposed, is belied by the record. Furthermore, the defendantreceived an advantageous plea and the record does not cast doubt on the apparent effectiveness ofcounsel (see People v Henry, 95 NY2d 563, 566 [2000]; People v Ford, 86 NY2d397, 404 [1995]; People v Moss, 74AD3d 1360 [2010]; People vGarrett, 68 AD3d 781, 782 [2009]; People v Boodhoo, 191 AD2d 448, 449[1993]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Dillon, J.P., Hall, Roman andCohen, JJ., concur.