People v. Blim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Blim

105 A.D.2d 1012, 483 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21099

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

DecidedNovember 29, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 105 A.D.2d 1012 (People v. Blim) 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. Blim, 105 A.D.2d 1012, 483 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21099 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schuyler County (Barrett, J.), rendered August 23, 1982, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of burglary in the third degree.

When this case was previously before this court, the majority concluded that reversal was mandated by reason of County Court’s failure to charge trespass in the third degree as a lesser included offense of burglary in the third degree (98 AD2d 944). Because of this conclusion, we found it unnecessary to reach the other issues presented except to note, as to one, that in the absence of any actual prejudice or a substantial risk thereof, there was no need to disqualify the District Attorney because he previously represented defendant on unrelated criminal matters (supra, at p 945). However, the Court of Appeals found no error in County Court’s refusal to charge the lesser included offense and, accordingly, reversed our order and remitted for our consideration of the other alleged errors (63 NY2d 718). We have now considered the remaining alleged errors and we find defendant’s arguments to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed. Main, J. P., Casey, Mikoll, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schuyler County (Barrett, J.), rendered August 23, 1982, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of burglary in the third degree.

When this case was previously before this court, the majority concluded that reversal was mandated by reason of County Court’s failure to charge trespass in the third degree as a lesser included offense of burglary in the third degree (98 AD2d 944). Because of this conclusion, we found it unnecessary to reach the other issues presented except to note, as to one, that in the absence of any actual prejudice or a substantial risk thereof, there was no need to disqualify the District Attorney because he previously represented defendant on unrelated criminal matters (supra, at p 945). However, the Court of Appeals found no error in County Court’s refusal to charge the lesser included offense and, accordingly, reversed our order and remitted for our consideration of the other alleged errors (63 NY2d 718). We have now considered the remaining alleged errors and we find defendant’s arguments to be without merit.

Judgment affirmed. Main, J. P., Casey, Mikoll, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.2d 1012, 483 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21099, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-blim-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack