PEOPLE, res, v. WILLIAM WALSH, def-ap

8186. PEOPLE, res, v. WILLIAM WALSH, def-ap — Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Robert S. Dean of counsel), for ap — Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Allen J. Vickey of counsel), for res — Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard D. Carruthers, J.), rendered November 23, 2009, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree (three counts), and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to two concurrent terms of 3 to 6 years, to run consecutively with another term of 3 to 6 years, modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of directing that all of the sentences run concurrently with each other, and otherwise affirmed.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

8186. PEOPLE, res, v. WILLIAM WALSH, def-ap — Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Robert S. Dean of counsel), for ap — Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Allen J. Vickey of counsel), for res — Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard D. Carruthers, J.), rendered November 23, 2009, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree (three counts), and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to two concurrent terms of 3 to 6 years, to run consecutively with another term of 3 to 6 years, modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of directing that all of the sentences run concurrently with each other, and otherwise affirmed.

The Appellate Division has “broad, plenary power to modify a sentence that is unduly harsh or severe under the circumstances, even though the sentence may be within the permissible statutory range” (People v. Delgado, 80 NY2d 780, 783 [1992]). “We may substitute our own discretion even where a trial court has not abused its discretion” (People v. Edwards, 37 AD3d 289, 290 [1st Dept 2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 843 [2007]) and may reduce a sentence in the interests of justice, taking into account factors such as a defendant’s age, physical and mental health, and remorse (see People v. Ehrlich, 176 AD2d 203, 204 [1st Dept 1991]).

PEOPLE, res, v. WILLIAM WALSH, def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal