People v. Hamilton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hamilton

70 A.D.2d 770, 417 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12265

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

DecidedMay 22, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 70 A.D.2d 770 (People v. Hamilton) 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. Hamilton, 70 A.D.2d 770, 417 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12265 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously modified, on the law and facts, and, as modified, affirmed, in accordance with the following memorandum: From the evidence received at defendant’s trial, it was impossible for him to have committed the greater offense of robbery in the first degree in violation of subdivision 4 of section 160.15 of the Penal Law without concomitantly by the same conduct committing the lesser offenses of robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the third degree and petit larceny. (See People v Hayes, 43 AD2d 99.) Therefore the judgment convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the third degree and petit larceny is reversed and those counts of the indictment are dismissed. (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court — robbery, first degree; robbery, second degree, and other offenses.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Schnepp, Doerr and Moule, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously modified, on the law and facts, and, as modified, affirmed, in accordance with the following memorandum: From the evidence received at defendant’s trial, it was impossible for him to have committed the greater offense of robbery in the first degree in violation of subdivision 4 of section 160.15 of the Penal Law without concomitantly by the same conduct committing the lesser offenses of robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the third degree and petit larceny. (See People v Hayes, 43 AD2d 99.) Therefore the judgment convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the third degree and petit larceny is reversed and those counts of the indictment are dismissed. (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court — robbery, first degree; robbery, second degree, and other offenses.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Schnepp, Doerr and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 A.D.2d 770, 417 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hamilton-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack