People v. Arthur

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Arthur

16 A.D.3d 592, 790 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3026

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 21, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 16 A.D.3d 592 (People v. Arthur) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Arthur, 16 A.D.3d 592, 790 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3026 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defen[593]*593dant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered January 12, 2004, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree and possession of burglar’s tools, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court properly denied the defendant’s request to charge the lesser-included offense of attempted criminal trespass in the second degree. Viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant (see People v Martin, 59 NY2d 704, 705 [1983]), there was no reasonable view of the evidence which would support a finding that the defendant committed attempted criminal trespass in the second degree but did not commit attempted burglary in the second degree (see CPL 300.50; People v Glover, 57 NY2d 61 [1982]; People v Rickett, 259 AD2d 636, 637 [1999]; People v Oswald, 245 AD2d 532 [1997]; People v Vargas, 168 AD2d 586 [1990]). Adams, J.P., Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Appeal by the defen[593]*593dant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered January 12, 2004, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree and possession of burglar’s tools, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court properly denied the defendant’s request to charge the lesser-included offense of attempted criminal trespass in the second degree. Viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant (see People v Martin, 59 NY2d 704, 705 [1983]), there was no reasonable view of the evidence which would support a finding that the defendant committed attempted criminal trespass in the second degree but did not commit attempted burglary in the second degree (see CPL 300.50; People v Glover, 57 NY2d 61 [1982]; People v Rickett, 259 AD2d 636, 637 [1999]; People v Oswald, 245 AD2d 532 [1997]; People v Vargas, 168 AD2d 586 [1990]). Adams, J.P., Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 592, 790 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-arthur-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack