The People of the State of New York v. Demetrius Harvard
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Criminal law sentencing issue concerning whether prison terms for reckless endangerment in the first degree and criminal mischief in the second degree should run consecutively or concurrently after a guilty plea.
The trial court convicted defendant on his guilty plea and imposed consecutive prison terms of 2 1/3 to 7 years for reckless endangerment in the first degree and 1 to 3 years for criminal mischief in the second degree.
The Appellate Division modified the sentence so that the two prison terms run concurrently rather than consecutively.
The court found the sentence excessive to the extent of the consecutive structure and exercised its discretion in the interest of justice to reduce it.
Background
Demetrius Harvard pleaded guilty in Supreme Court, New York County, to reckless endangerment in the first degree and criminal mischief in the second degree. On May 23, 2022, the court sentenced him to consecutive prison terms of 2 1/3 to 7 years and 1 to 3 years.
Lower Court Decision
The lower court accepted defendant's guilty plea, entered a judgment of conviction on both offenses, and imposed consecutive sentences.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division unanimously modified the judgment, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by directing that the sentences run concurrently instead of consecutively. The conviction was otherwise affirmed.
Legal Significance
This decision shows that the Appellate Division may leave a guilty-plea conviction intact while reducing the severity of the sentence when it concludes that the punishment is excessive, particularly by changing consecutive terms to concurrent terms.
Harvard's convictions remained in place, but his aggregate prison exposure was reduced because the appellate court determined that concurrent, not consecutive, sentencing was the just result.