The conviction and 20-year prison term for Akeem Simmons, the then 23-year-old man who, with a partner, burglarized a home on Park Avenue, Batavia, in January 2014 will stand an appeals court has ruled.
An attorney for Simmons appealed both the conviction on a claim of an undisclosed deal with a witness and the sentence as too harsh.
The Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, ruled against both motions.
Simmons and Nathaniel Davis burglarized the occupied home and Simmons was accused of carrying a gun during the commission of the crime. Davis testified against Simmons and after his testimony, Davis was sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to burglary.
At trial, Attorney Thomas Burns, representing Simmons, argued that it seemed clear to him that there was an undisclosed deal between Davis and the District Attorney's Office.
At trial Davis, under oath, denied there was any deal in exchange for his testimony. District Attorney Lawrence Friedman said no deal was made in order to get Davis to testify.
A request by Burns for a separate hearing was denied by Judge Robert C. Noonan.
The appellate judges found there was no evidence to support the claim of an undisclosed deal.
The judges also ruled that because of the prior criminal record of Simmons, which included two prior burglary convictions, the 20-year prison sentence was neither harsh nor severe.
while I am not a criminal, 20
while I am not a criminal, 20 years in prison for burglary seems very harsh to me.....
20 years is not too harsh for
20 years is not too harsh for a repeat offender.
John, scroll up and you'll
John, scroll up and you'll find a sexual predator against children was sentenced to 15 years in prison. with that sentence in mind, twenty years for burglary seems harsh. repeat offender? is it right to sentence someone twice for the same crime. ?
David, if somebody keeps
David, if somebody keeps committing the same crime over and over, like this man, I have no problem putting him away for 20 years.
John, he may have committed
John, he may have committed the same crime again but he paid for it each time too. taking several crimes that have been answered for and lumping them together to create another crime is wrong. I understand this is the American way of criminal justice but that does not make it right.
David, that's your opinion. I
David, that's your opinion. I just don't agree. I see no reason to let somebody keeping stealing people's property with the chance that sooner or later some victim might be hurt.
He broke the law more than just once. Clearly the penalties he was given were not enough to stop him from committing crime again.