People v Rivera
2021 NY Slip Op 03880 [195 AD3d 1249]
June 17, 2021
Appellate Division, Third Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 4, 2021


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Mike A. Rivera Jr., Appellant.

G. Scott Walling, Slingerlands, for appellant.

Michael A. Korchak, District Attorney, Binghamton (Rita M. Basile of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Dooley, J.), renderedAugust 30, 2018, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of attempted murderin the second degree, attempted assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree,strangulation in the second degree (two counts), sexual abuse in the first degree and unlawfulimprisonment in the first degree.

Defendant was charged in a seven-count indictment with attempted murder in the seconddegree, attempted assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree, strangulation in thesecond degree (two counts), sexual abuse in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment in thefirst degree stemming from a domestic incident. Defendant pleaded guilty to the entire indictmentwith the understanding that the sentence imposed would not exceed 15 years in prison and fiveyears of postrelease supervision. At sentencing, County Court imposed a prison term of 12 yearsfollowed by five years of postrelease supervision upon his conviction of attempted murder in thesecond degree and equal or lesser, concurrent terms on the remaining convictions. Defendantappeals.

We are unpersuaded by defendant's sole contention that the sentence is harsh and excessivein light of his lack of criminal history and his value to his family, friends and community andbecause his actions were entirely out of character. Initially, we note that the sentencing agreementwas considerably less than the maximum permissible prison sentence of 25 years that could havebeen imposed on the top count in the indictment of attempted murder in the second degree, aclass B violent felony offense (see Penal Law §§ 70.02 [1] [a]; [3] [a];110.00, 125.25 [1]). The record reveals that County Court thoroughly considered mitigatingfactors, defendant's particular circumstances leading to the offenses, defendant's remorse and theoutpouring of support from family and friends. Those mitigating factors, however, do not negatethe seriousness of the crimes for which defendant was convicted. The court weighed themitigating evidence against the violent and horrendous nature of his crimes. As the recorddemonstrates that the court appropriately considered the relevant factors in imposing thesentence, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances that warrant thereduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302,305-306 [1981]; People v Fisher,181 AD3d 1051, 1053 [2020]).

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Lynch, Clark and Aarons, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment isaffirmed.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.