People v. Casey
This text of 82 A.D.3d 1005 (People v. Casey) 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.
Opinion
The defendant’s contention that his conviction of burglary in the third degree in the state of New Jersey did not qualify as a predicate New York felony pursuant to Penal Law § 70.06 (1) (b) (i) is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Samms, 95 NY2d 52, 57 [2000]). However, we reach this issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v Boston, 79 AD3d 1140 [2010]; People v Grigg, 73 AD3d 806 [2010]; People v Burgos, 97 AD2d 826 [1983]). As the People correctly concede, the out-of-state crime of which the defendant was convicted would not constitute a felony in New York for the purposes of enhanced sentencing (see People v Muniz, 74 NY2d 464, 469 [1989]; NJ Stat Ann § 2C:18-2).
Accordingly, the defendant’s adjudication as a second felony offender and the sentence imposed must be vacated, and the matter must be remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, so that the defendant may be resentenced as a first-time felony offender (see Penal Law §§ 140.20, 70.00 [2] [d]; [3] [b]; People v Cochran, 10 AD3d 563 [2004]).
In light of our determination, we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention (see People v Burgos, 97 AD2d at 827-828). Angiolillo, J.E, Florio, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
82 A.D.3d 1005, 918 N.Y.2d 727, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-casey-nyappdiv-2011.