People v. Ennis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ennis

139 A.D.3d 505, 30 N.Y.S.3d 540

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

DecidedMay 17, 2016

Docket1037 7870/98

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 139 A.D.3d 505 (People v. Ennis) 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. Ennis, 139 A.D.3d 505, 30 N.Y.S.3d 540 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Roger S. Hayes, J.), rendered October 4, 2013, resentencing defendant to an aggregate term of 19V2 to 39 years, unanimously affirmed.

Following defendant’s successful CPL 440.20 motion to set aside his original sentence on grounds not at issue on appeal, the resentencing court imposed a lawful combination of concurrent and consecutive sentences. The court properly imposed consecutive sentences for separate and distinct acts committed *506 against different victims at different times, notwithstanding that the court ordered all of these consecutive sentences to run concurrently with defendant’s sentence on his conviction of conspiracy in the second degree, as was required by law given that the nonconspiracy crimes were among the overt acts supporting the conspiracy conviction (see People v Parks, 95 NY2d 811, 814 [2000]). However, defendant’s assertion that the sentences for the nonconspiracy convictions are effectively consecutive to the conspiracy sentence is without merit. “[Sentences may run consecutively to each other even though each of those sentences is required to run concurrently with the same third sentence” (People v Rodriguez, 112 AD3d 488, 489 [1st Dept 2013], affd 25 NY3d 238 [2015]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Andrias, Moskowitz and Kahn, JJ.

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

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Roger S. Hayes, J.), rendered October 4, 2013, resentencing defendant to an aggregate term of 19V2 to 39 years, unanimously affirmed.

Following defendant’s successful CPL 440.20 motion to set aside his original sentence on grounds not at issue on appeal, the resentencing court imposed a lawful combination of concurrent and consecutive sentences. The court properly imposed consecutive sentences for separate and distinct acts committed *506 against different victims at different times, notwithstanding that the court ordered all of these consecutive sentences to run concurrently with defendant’s sentence on his conviction of conspiracy in the second degree, as was required by law given that the nonconspiracy crimes were among the overt acts supporting the conspiracy conviction (see People v Parks, 95 NY2d 811, 814 [2000]). However, defendant’s assertion that the sentences for the nonconspiracy convictions are effectively consecutive to the conspiracy sentence is without merit. “[Sentences may run consecutively to each other even though each of those sentences is required to run concurrently with the same third sentence” (People v Rodriguez, 112 AD3d 488, 489 [1st Dept 2013], affd 25 NY3d 238 [2015]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Andrias, Moskowitz and Kahn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.3d 505, 30 N.Y.S.3d 540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ennis-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack