PEOPLE v. MONDOLFI

Decided and Entered: October 23, 2003
13995
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
Respondent,
v
BARTHOLOMEW MONDOLFI,
Appellant.
________________________________
Calendar Date: September 24, 2003
Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew .....

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Decided and Entered: October 23, 2003 13995 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v BARTHOLOMEW MONDOLFI, Appellant. ________________________________ Calendar Date: September 24, 2003 Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Spain and Carpinello, JJ. __________ Norbert A. Higgins, Binghamton, for appellant. Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), for respondent. __________ Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Mathews, J.), rendered April 29, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree. Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree in full satisfaction of a three-count indictment. Subsequently, he was sentenced as a second felony offender to an indeterminate prison term of 5 to 10 years. On this appeal, defendant contends that his prison sentence is harsh and excessive. Our review of the record, however, discloses several factors that militate against this argument, including defendant’s extensive criminal history and the fact that he was on parole at the time that he committed the instant offense (see People v Ballinger, 299 AD2d 738, 739 [2002]). Notably, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his negotiated plea agreement which substantially reduced his sentencing exposure (see People v Munoz, 282 AD2d 775 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 922 [2001]; People v Sanchez, 143 AD2d 953 [1988], lv denied 73 NY2d 859 [1988]). As we find no extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction in defendant’s sentence in the interest of justice, it will not be disturbed (see People v Rosa-Oyola, 301 AD2d 750 [2003], lv denied 99 NY2d 658 [2003]; People v Bell, 290 AD2d 729 [2002]). Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. ENTER: Michael J. Novack Clerk of the Court

PEOPLE v. MONDOLFI

Decided and Entered: October 23, 2003 13995 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v BARTHOLOMEW MONDOLFI, Appellant. ________________________________ Calendar Date: September 24, 2003 Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew .....

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal

Decided and Entered: October 23, 2003
13995
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
Respondent,
v
BARTHOLOMEW MONDOLFI,
Appellant.
________________________________
Calendar Date: September 24, 2003
Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew .....