People v. Dawkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dawkins

289 A.D.2d 589, 735 N.Y.S.2d 818, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13097

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

DecidedDecember 31, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 589 (People v. Dawkins) 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. Dawkins, 289 A.D.2d 589, 735 N.Y.S.2d 818, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13097 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by [590]*590the People, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), dated October 19, 1998, as granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to dismiss counts one and four of Suffolk County Indictment No. 1044/97.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, that branch of the motion is denied, the counts are reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings.

It was improper for the County Court to dismiss two counts of the indictment. This was not the rare and “unusual case that cries out for fundamental justice beyond the confines of conventional considerations” (People v Beige, 41 NY2d 60, 62-63 [concurring opn by Fuchsberg, J.]; see, People v Insignares, 109 AD2d 221). S. Miller, J. P., Friedmann, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by [590]*590the People, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), dated October 19, 1998, as granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to dismiss counts one and four of Suffolk County Indictment No. 1044/97.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, that branch of the motion is denied, the counts are reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings.

It was improper for the County Court to dismiss two counts of the indictment. This was not the rare and “unusual case that cries out for fundamental justice beyond the confines of conventional considerations” (People v Beige, 41 NY2d 60, 62-63 [concurring opn by Fuchsberg, J.]; see, People v Insignares, 109 AD2d 221). S. Miller, J. P., Friedmann, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 589, 735 N.Y.S.2d 818, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dawkins-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack