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. Robert MORGAN, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Columbia County (Czajka, J.), rendered February 27, 1997, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree.
Convicted after a trial of the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, defendant was sentenced to a prison term of 8 1/3 to 25 years and a concurrent sentence of one year, respectively. We reject defendant's contention that imposing the most severe sentence possible for selling a relatively small quantity of cocaine is harsh and excessive (see, e.g., People v. Charron, 198 A.D.2d 722, 723, 604 N.Y.S.2d 311, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 803, 611 N.Y.S.2d 139, 633 N.E.2d 494). In imposing the sentence, the record demonstrates that County Court appropriately considered evidence tending to establish defendant's involvement in drug trafficking as well as defendant's failure to accept responsibility for his actions and his lack of remorse. Notwithstanding the fact that the sentence imposed was much more severe than that offered to defendant in a proposed pretrial plea agreement, defendant's contention that the sentence imposed was in retaliation for exercising his right to trial is not supported by the record (see, e.g., People v. Simon, 180 A.D.2d 866, 580 N.Y.S.2d 493, lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 838, 587 N.Y.S.2d 922, 923, 600 N.E.2d 649, 650). Finally, because defendant was convicted after a trial upon legally sufficient evidence, he is precluded from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence before the Grand Jury (see, People v. Carey, 241 A.D.2d 748, 751, 660 N.Y.S.2d 886, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 1010, 666 N.Y.S.2d 105, 688 N.E.2d 1388; People v. Schulze, 224 A.D.2d 729, 638 N.Y.S.2d 176, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 853, 644 N.Y.S.2d 700, 667 N.E.2d 350).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: September 17, 1998
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)