People v. Dantzler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dantzler

123 A.D.2d 327, 506 N.Y.S.2d 220, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60102

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

DecidedSeptember 8, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 123 A.D.2d 327 (People v. Dantzler) 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. Dantzler, 123 A.D.2d 327, 506 N.Y.S.2d 220, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60102 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hayes, J.), rendered March 19, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), assault in the second degree, and assault in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reversing the conviction of assault in the second degree as charged in the third count of the indictment, and vacating the sentence imposed thereon, and that count of the indictment dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed.

The third count of the indictment charging the defendant with assault in the second degree, pursuant to Penal Law § 120.05 (6), was an inclusory concurrent count of robbery in the second degree as charged in the first count of the indictment pursuant to Penal Law § 160.10 (2) (a). Therefore, the guilty verdict on the greater offense requires a dismissal of [328]*328the lesser offense (CPL 300.40 [3] [b]; People v Wiley, 101 AD2d 818).

We have considered the defendant’s other contention and have found it to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Bracken and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hayes, J.), rendered March 19, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), assault in the second degree, and assault in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reversing the conviction of assault in the second degree as charged in the third count of the indictment, and vacating the sentence imposed thereon, and that count of the indictment dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed.

The third count of the indictment charging the defendant with assault in the second degree, pursuant to Penal Law § 120.05 (6), was an inclusory concurrent count of robbery in the second degree as charged in the first count of the indictment pursuant to Penal Law § 160.10 (2) (a). Therefore, the guilty verdict on the greater offense requires a dismissal of [328]*328the lesser offense (CPL 300.40 [3] [b]; People v Wiley, 101 AD2d 818).

We have considered the defendant’s other contention and have found it to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Bracken and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D.2d 327, 506 N.Y.S.2d 220, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dantzler-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack