| People v Porter |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 00501 [168 AD3d 1283] |
| January 24, 2019 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Latoya Porter, Appellant. |
John R. Trice, Elmira, for appellant.
Stephen K. Cornwell Jr., District Attorney, Binghamton (Stephen D. Ferri of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Cawley Jr., J.), renderedOctober 7, 2016, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of attempted murderin the second degree.
In satisfaction of a four-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted murder inthe second degree with the understanding that there would be a sentencing cap of 11 years inprison followed by five years of postrelease supervision. The plea stemmed from an incidentwherein defendant fired multiple shots at a 17-year-old alleged gang member in an effort "toteach the gang members a lesson." Defendant and her attorney each asked for leniency prior tosentencing, citing, among other things, defendant's abusive childhood, mental health issues andefforts to protect her children from being terrorized by a local street gang. In response, the Peoplenoted that defendant fired multiple shots at the victim on a residential street in the middle of theafternoon and asked that County Court impose a prison term of not less than 10 years. CountyCourt thereafter sentenced defendant to a prison term of nine years followed by five years ofpostrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals, arguing that the sentence imposed is harsh andexcessive.
We affirm. "A sentence that falls within the permissible statutory range will not be disturbedunless it can be shown that the sentencing court abused its discretion or extraordinarycircumstances exist warranting a modification" (People v Stone, 164 AD3d 1577, 1578 [2018] [internal quotationmarks and citations omitted]; accordPeople v Westmoreland, 164 AD3d 1550, 1550 [2018]). Defendant was convicted of aclass B violent felony for which she could have received a prison term ranging from 5 to 25 years(see Penal Law §§ 70.02 [1] [a]; [3] [a]; 110.00, 110.05 [3]; 125.25[1]). Despite the presence of certain mitigating factors, which County Court duly considered, weare not persuaded that the prison term imposed, which was "consistent with the terms ofdefendant's favorable plea agreement and fell toward the lower end of the statutory range"(People v Westmoreland, 164 AD3d at 1550), is harsh and excessive, particularly as thephotographic evidence in the record depicts defendant firing her weapon feet away from theteenage victim as he attempted to flee (see e.g. People v Tschorn, 164 AD3d 970, 971 [2018]). As wediscern no extraordinary circumstances or abuse of discretion warranting a reduction of thesentence imposed, it will not be disturbed (see e.g. People v Crump, 107 AD3d 1046, 1047 [2013], lvdenied 21 NY3d 1014 [2013]).
Garry, P.J., Clark, Mulvey, Devine and Pritzker, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.