People v. Caridi
| Decision Date | 20 March 1989 |
| Citation | 148 A.D.2d 625,539 N.Y.S.2d 88 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph CARIDI, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Broderick, Broderick & Redmond, Bayside (Patrick F. Broderick, of counsel), for appellant.
Denis Dillon, Dist. Atty., Mineola (James P. McCormack and Kenneth Fitzgerald, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and MANGANO, THOMPSON and RUBIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Nassau County (Goodman, J.), both rendered November 14, 1986, convicting him of (1) robbery in the second degree and criminal usury in the first degree under Superior Court Information No. 64045, and (2) promoting gambling in the first degree under Indictment No. 63468, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.
ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.
The County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's application to withdraw his pleas of guilty before imposing a higher sentence than that originally negotiated in the plea agreement. As a general rule, the sentencing court may not impose a sentence greater than the one bargained for without first affording the defendant an opportunity to withdraw the plea and stand trial (see, People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 437 N.Y.S.2d 961, 419 N.E.2d 864; People v. Selikoff, 35 N.Y.2d 227, 360 N.Y.S.2d 623, 318 N.E.2d 784, cert. den., 419 U.S. 1122, 95 S.Ct. 806, 42 L.Ed.2d 822). This rule, however, does not apply to the instant case. The record indicates the clear intent of the court to condition the promised sentence upon the defendant not becoming involved in any further "trouble" of a criminal nature between the time of the plea proceeding and his appearance at the scheduled sentencing date. The defendant, who had extensive prior experience in the criminal justice system, manifested his acceptance of these terms. In view of the defendant's arrest and indictment for criminal offenses committed after the plea proceedings and prior to the scheduled sentencing date, the court was no longer bound by its promise and was free to impose a higher sentence (see, People v. Gamble, 111 A.D.2d 869, 490 N.Y.S.2d 598; People v. Innes, 111 A.D.2d 356, 489 N.Y.S.2d 121; cf., People v. Mark White, App.Div., 535 N.Y.S.2d 72; People v. Cook, 130 A.D.2d 503, 515 N.Y.S.2d 84).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Maietta
...for criminal offenses committed after the plea proceedings and prior to the scheduled sentencing date" (People v. Caridi, 148 A.D.2d 625, 625-626, 539 N.Y.S.2d 88 (1989), app. den. 74 N.Y.2d 662, 543 N.Y.S.2d 405, 541 N.E.2d 434 The dissent concedes that the provision of an enhanced sentenc......
-
People v. Banks
...fair means within the discretion of the sentencing court. We do not read the decisions by the Second Department in People v. Caridi, 148 A.D.2d 625, 539 N.Y.S.2d 88, lv. denied 74 N.Y.2d 662, 543 N.Y.S.2d 405, 541 N.E.2d 434, and People v. Innes, 111 A.D.2d 356, 489 N.Y.S.2d 121, lv. denied......
-
People v. Ellis
...Accordingly, the court was free to impose a more severe sentence, which was not excessive (see, People v. Moore, supra; People v. Caridi, 148 A.D.2d 625, 539 N.Y.S.2d 88; People v. Betheny, 147 A.D.2d 488, 537 N.Y.S.2d 586; People v. Raife, 146 A.D.2d 652, 536 N.Y.S.2d 854; cf., People v. R......
-
People v. Boyd
...of imprisonment had not been met, the court was not obligated to allow the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea (see, People v. Caridi, 148 A.D.2d 625, 539 N.Y.S.2d 88; People v. Gamble, 111 A.D.2d 869, 870, 490 N.Y.S.2d 598). In addition, the defendant waived any right he may have had to ......