People v Washington

Annotate this Case
People v Washington 2015 NY Slip Op 00144 Decided on January 2, 2015 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on January 2, 2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
1401 KA 12-01164

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

VERNON WASHINGTON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Joseph E. Fahey, J.), rendered July 22, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.



FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (CHRISTINE M. COOK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (MISHA A. COULSON OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]), defendant contends that County Court abused its discretion in directing that the sentence run consecutively to, rather than concurrently with, a prior undischarged sentence for an unrelated conviction. We reject that contention. The court did not abuse its discretion in determining that no mitigating circumstances were present to warrant the imposition of a concurrent sentence in the interest of justice (see Penal Law § 70.25 [2-b]; see generally People v Garcia, 84 NY2d 336, 341-343; People v Elder, 71 AD3d 1483, 1484, lv denied 16 NY3d 743, reconsideration denied 16 NY3d 858).

Entered: January 2, 2015

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.