People v. Wallace
Opinion of the Court
—Appeal by
Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.
The promise of an increased sentence was part of the agreement the defendant entered into during the violation of probation proceeding. Since she did not fulfill a condition of her sentencing agreement by failing to return to court for sentencing, the court had the right to impose a greater sentence (see, People v Fields, 197 AD2d 633; People v Miller, 170 AD2d 464, 465). Therefore, she has no cause to complain that the sentence imposed is excessive (see, People v Fields, supra; People v Miller, supra; People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816, 817). We decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to reduce the defendant’s sentence. Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.