Court Opinion

ID: 4019748
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-28 15:08:00.296311+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:58.428752
License: Public Domain

*1032
   
  Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Lehmann, J.), rendered February 21, 2014, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted strangulation in the second degree.
 

  As a result of a domestic dispute culminating in a physical altercation with his paramour, defendant was charged in a superior court information with the crime of strangulation in the second degree. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted strangulation in the second degree, a class E felony. County Court ultimately sentenced defendant, in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, to a five-year term of probation.
 

  Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that the five-year term of probation is harsh and excessive and should be reduced to three years in the interest of justice. We do not agree. “A sentence that falls within the permissible statutory range will not be disturbed unless it can be shown that the sentencing court abused its discretion or extraordinary circumstances exist warranting a modification”
  
   (People v Ramos,
  
  133 AD3d 904, 908 [2015] [internal quotations marks and citations omitted],
  
   lv denied
  
  26 NY3d 1149 [2016];
  
   People v Simmons,
  
  122 AD3d 1169, 1169 [2014],
  
   lv denied 25
  
  NY3d 1171 [2015]). Given defendant’s prior criminal history, within both California and this state, and the fact that the term of probation was the length negotiated by the parties and that defendant was already on probation when he committed the instant offense, we discern no extraordinary circumstances or an abuse of discretion that would warrant modification of the sentence
  
   (see
  
  CPL 470.15 [6] [b];
  
   People v Johnson,
  
  182 AD2d 922, 922 [1992],
  
   lv denied
  
  80 NY2d 833 [1992];
  
   People v Manners,
  
  54 AD2d 938, 938 [1976]).
 

  McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Lynch, Mulvey and Aarons, JJ., concur.
 

  Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.