| People v Gonzalez |
| 2020 NY Slip Op 05092 [186 AD3d 1832] |
| September 24, 2020 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Irwing Gonzalez, Also Known as Pri,Appellant. |
Rural Law Center of New York, Castleton (Keith F. Schockmel of counsel), forappellant.
Karen A. Heggen, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Gordon W. Eddy of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (Murphy III, J.), renderedJuly 7, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of acontrolled substance in the second degree.
In full satisfaction of a 15-count indictment charging him with numerous drug-related crimes,defendant agreed to plead guilty to one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in thesecond degree with the understanding that he would be sentenced to a prison term of eight yearsfollowed by five years of postrelease supervision—with a recommendation that he beallowed to participate in a shock incarceration program. The plea agreement also requireddefendant to waive his right to appeal. Defendant pleaded guilty in conformity with the pleaagreement, and County Court imposed the contemplated sentence. Defendant appeals.
The People, citing People vThomas (34 NY3d 545 [2019]), concede that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal isinvalid and, therefore, his challenge to the severity of the sentence imposed is not precluded. Thatsaid, defendant was afforded a favorable resolution to an indictment charging him with multiple,drug-related felonies, and he agreed to the sentence imposed (see People v Goldwire, 168 AD3d 1286, 1286 [2019], lvdenied 33 NY3d 976 [2019]), which was less than the statutory maximum (see PenalLaw §§ 70.71 [2] [b] [ii]; 220.41 [1]). We therefore find no extraordinarycircumstances or abuse of discretion warranting a reduction of the agreed-upon sentence in theinterest of justice (see People vGresham, 163 AD3d 1064, 1065 [2018])—notwithstanding defendant's lack of aprior criminal history. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Lynch, J.P., Clark, Mulvey, Pritzker and Colangelo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.