People v. Woods
| Decision Date | 25 May 2017 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph WOODS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
150 A.D.3d 1560
55 N.Y.S.3d 780
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Joseph WOODS, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 25, 2017.
G. Scott Walling, Schenectady, for appellant.
P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Emily A. Schultz of counsel), for respondent.
Before: McCARTHY, J.P., EGAN JR., ROSE, DEVINE and CLARK, JJ.
ROSE, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (McDonough, J.), rendered May 14, 2015 in Albany County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.
In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree and he waived his right to appeal, both orally and in writing. Under the terms of the plea agreement, he was to be sentenced as a second felony offender to 4 ½ years in prison, to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision. During the plea proceedings, Supreme Court administered a Parker admonishment advising defendant that the plea agreementincluded the condition that he not be arrested prior to sentencing and that, if he were, it would not be bound to impose the agreed-upon sentence. Prior to sentencing, Supreme Court became aware that defendant had been arrested and jailed for criminal sale of a controlled substance in connection with an incident that occurred before he entered his guilty plea and that, thereafter, he was also indicted on another charge of criminal sale of controlled substance for an incident that occurred after he entered his guilty plea. As a result of the charge based on the drug sale occurring after defendant entered his guilty plea, the court informed him that it was not obligated to abide by the sentencing promise and imposed an enhanced sentence of seven years in prison, followed by three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.
Turning first to defendant's challenge to the enhancement of the sentence, we note that "[a] court may enhance an agreed-upon sentence after it is established that the defendant violated a condition of the plea agreement" (People v. McDermott, 68 A.D.3d 1453, 1453, 891 N.Y.S.2d 515 [2009] ; see People v. Davis, 30 A.D.3d 893, 894, 817 N.Y.S.2d 752 [2006], lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 847, 823 N.Y.S.2d 776, 857 N.E.2d 71 [2006] ). Here, Supreme Court enhanced the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Meddaugh
...contention that her counsel's performance was deficient for failing to advise her of or request judicial diversion under the program 55 N.Y.S.3d 780created by CPL article 216, whether an eligible defendant will be offered judicial diversion pursuant to that article remains within the trial ......
-
People v. Benn
...3 N.Y.3d 714, 715, 786 N.Y.S.2d 374, 819 N.E.2d 990 [2004] ), he readily admitted to the proscribed conduct (see People v. Woods, 150 A.D.3d 1560, 1561, 55 N.Y.S.3d 780 [2017], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 1095, 63 N.Y.S.3d 12, 85 N.E.3d 107 [2017] ; People v. Davis, 30 A.D.3d 893, 895, 817 N.Y.S.2d......
-
People v. Bridge
...had no further questions about the waiver of appeal (see People v. Nieves, 163 A.D.3d at 1359, 77 N.Y.S.3d 908 ; People v. Hess, 150 A.D.3d 1560, 1560, 52 N.Y.S.3d 686 [2017] ; 86 N.Y.S.3d 347 People v. Cuomo, 144 A.D.3d 1266, 1267, 40 N.Y.S.3d 288 [2016] ). Accordingly, the combined oral c......
-
Woods v. Superintendent
...ultimately pled guilty to fourth degree criminal possession of a controlled substance on January 29, 2015. See People v. Woods, 150 A.D.3d 1560, 1560 (3d Dep't 2017); see generally Dkt. No. 20-3 at 19-42 (plea hearing transcript). During the plea hearing, petitioner indicated that he had no......