People v. Berard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Berard

142 A.D.2d 927, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14942

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

DecidedJuly 7, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 142 A.D.2d 927 (People v. Berard) 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. Berard, 142 A.D.2d 927, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14942 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and defendant remanded to Niagara County Court for resentencing, in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant’s conviction for escape in the second degree (Penal Law § 205.10 [2]) cannot be sustained because the People failed to prove that at the time of defendant’s escape he had been lawfully arrested for a felony (People v Jeffries, 129 AD2d 962, 963; People v Warren, 103 AD2d 760). The proof, however, was sufficient to support conviction for the lesser included offense of escape in the third degree (Penal Law § 205.05).

Defendant’s conviction for escape in the second degree is hereby reduced to escape in the third degree and defendant is remanded to Niagara County Court for resentencing (CPL 470.15 [2] [c]; 470.20 [4]).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.—conspiracy, fifth degree, and other charges.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Denman, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and defendant remanded to Niagara County Court for resentencing, in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant’s conviction for escape in the second degree (Penal Law § 205.10 [2]) cannot be sustained because the People failed to prove that at the time of defendant’s escape he had been lawfully arrested for a felony (People v Jeffries, 129 AD2d 962, 963; People v Warren, 103 AD2d 760). The proof, however, was sufficient to support conviction for the lesser included offense of escape in the third degree (Penal Law § 205.05).

Defendant’s conviction for escape in the second degree is hereby reduced to escape in the third degree and defendant is remanded to Niagara County Court for resentencing (CPL 470.15 [2] [c]; 470.20 [4]).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.—conspiracy, fifth degree, and other charges.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Denman, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 A.D.2d 927, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-berard-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack