People v Sindoni

2019 NY Slip Op 06021 [175 AD3d 750]

August 1, 2019

Appellate Division, Third Department

As corrected through Wednesday, October 2, 2019

[*1]

The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Joseph G. Sindoni Jr., Appellant.

John R. Trice, Elmira, for appellant.

Kirk O. Martin, District Attorney, Owego (Sandra L. Cardone of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tioga County (Dooley, J.), rendered May 5,2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of burglary in the second degree(five counts), attempted burglary in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourthdegree.

In satisfaction of two indictments, defendant pleaded guilty to five counts of burglary in thesecond degree, attempted burglary in the second degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree.Consistent with the terms of the plea agreement, County Court sentenced defendant, a secondviolent felony offender, to an aggregate prison term of 15 years, followed by five years ofpostrelease supervision, on the burglary and attempted burglary convictions, and a consecutiveprison term of 11/2 to 3 years on the conviction of grand larceny in the fourthdegree, all of which were to run concurrently with a previously imposed sentence. Defendant'ssole contention on appeal is that the sentence was harsh and excessive given his long-termaddiction to drugs and the fact that no physical harm occurred in the course of his criminalactivity. Notwithstanding these factors, we disagree. "A sentence that falls within the permissiblestatutory range will not be disturbed unless it can be shown that the sentencing court abused itsdiscretion or extraordinary circumstances exist warranting a modification" (People v Stone, 164 AD3d 1577,1578 [2018] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]). County Court consideredappropriate factors in imposing the statutorily-permissible sentence, including defendant'scriminal history. Upon review of the record, we discern no abuse of discretion or extraordinarycircumstances warranting a reduction of the agreed sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Nevins, 161 AD3d1393, 1394 [2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 939 [2018]; People v Garner, 40 AD3d 1210,1210 [2007]).

Garry, P.J., Clark, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.