People v. Fabre

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fabre

288 A.D.2d 392, 733 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11194

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

DecidedNovember 19, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 288 A.D.2d 392 (People v. Fabre) 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. Fabre, 288 A.D.2d 392, 733 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11194 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered January 19, 2000, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the People’s case rested solely on the theory that he had unlawfully entered a dwelling, and thus it was reversible error for the trial court to charge the portion of Penal Law § 140.25 which concerns “remain[ing] unlawfully” in a dwelling (see, People v Gaines, 74 NY2d 358). This contention is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Santucci, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Crane, 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, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered January 19, 2000, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the People’s case rested solely on the theory that he had unlawfully entered a dwelling, and thus it was reversible error for the trial court to charge the portion of Penal Law § 140.25 which concerns “remain[ing] unlawfully” in a dwelling (see, People v Gaines, 74 NY2d 358). This contention is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Santucci, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 392, 733 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fabre-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack