Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. David A. SIPE, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins County (Barrett, J.), rendered March 16, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of robbery in the first degree (three counts), grand larceny in the third degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.
Defendant was charged in an 11-count indictment with numerous crimes after robbing a bank in the City of Ithaca, Tompkins County. After placing a bag over his head, defendant entered a bank and, at gunpoint, demanded that the teller turn over money. After leaving with the money, defendant was involved in a high speed car chase with police and was ultimately apprehended. Defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the third degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree in full satisfaction of the indictment. No promise was made concerning sentencing. Defendant was subsequently sentenced to various concurrent terms of imprisonment, the maximum of which was nine years on the robbery convictions.
Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the sentence is harsh and excessive. Notwithstanding defendant's lack of criminal record, we find his argument unconvincing (see e.g. People v. Curry, 294 A.D.2d 608, 612, 741 N.Y.S.2d 324 [2002], lv. denied 98 N.Y.2d 674, 746 N.Y.S.2d 463, 774 N.E.2d 228 [2002] ). The circumstances of the incident reveal that defendant carefully planned the robbery, seriously traumatized bank employees while executing it and jeopardized the safety of the police and the public during the high speed chase. Consequently, we find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice (see People v. King, 277 A.D.2d 708, 712, 716 N.Y.S.2d 141 [2000], lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 802, 726 N.Y.S.2d 380, 750 N.E.2d 82 [2001] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 06, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)