People v. Bonaparte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bonaparte

304 A.D.2d 503, 760 N.Y.S.2d 410, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4487

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

DecidedApril 29, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 304 A.D.2d 503 (People v. Bonaparte) 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. Bonaparte, 304 A.D.2d 503, 760 N.Y.S.2d 410, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4487 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered October 12, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of eight years, unanimously affirmed.

Even if we were to find that defendant’s motion to suppress a shopping bag and stolen merchandise seized outside the store should have been granted, we would find the error to be harmless in view of the overwhelming independent evidence of the robbery inside the store, including multiple eyewitness testimony and surveillance tapes (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 [1975]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered October 12, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of eight years, unanimously affirmed.

Even if we were to find that defendant’s motion to suppress a shopping bag and stolen merchandise seized outside the store should have been granted, we would find the error to be harmless in view of the overwhelming independent evidence of the robbery inside the store, including multiple eyewitness testimony and surveillance tapes (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 [1975]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 503, 760 N.Y.S.2d 410, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bonaparte-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack