People v. Lamb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lamb

149 A.D.2d 943, 540 N.Y.S.2d 228, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5956

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

DecidedApril 14, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 149 A.D.2d 943 (People v. Lamb) 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. Lamb, 149 A.D.2d 943, 540 N.Y.S.2d 228, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5956 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously modified on the law by vacating defendant’s conviction of grand larceny in the second degree and the sentence imposed thereon and dismissing count two of the indictment and as modified affirmed. Memorandum: Although the trial court submitted all four counts of the indictment to the jury, the jury found defendant guilty of counts one, three and four, but failed to render a verdict on count two charging grand larceny in the second degree. The People concede that the jury’s failure to render a verdict on the grand larceny count resulted in an incomplete verdict. When a court accepts a verdict which is incomplete, it constitutes an acquittal on every count on which no verdict was rendered (CPL 310.50 [3]; People v Calderon, 113 AD2d 894, 896, lv denied 67 NY2d 881).

The court did not abuse its discretion in its Sandoval ruling which permitted defendant to be cross-examined on the acts underlying two prior burglaries for which he had been adjudicated a youthful offender (see, People v Greer, 42 NY2d 170, 176; People v Duffy, 36 NY2d 258, 264, cert denied 423 US 861; People v Markidis, 142 AD2d 990, lv denied 72 NY2d 921). (Appeal from judgment of Wayne County Court, Parenti, J.— burglary, third degree, and other charges.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Davis, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously modified on the law by vacating defendant’s conviction of grand larceny in the second degree and the sentence imposed thereon and dismissing count two of the indictment and as modified affirmed. Memorandum: Although the trial court submitted all four counts of the indictment to the jury, the jury found defendant guilty of counts one, three and four, but failed to render a verdict on count two charging grand larceny in the second degree. The People concede that the jury’s failure to render a verdict on the grand larceny count resulted in an incomplete verdict. When a court accepts a verdict which is incomplete, it constitutes an acquittal on every count on which no verdict was rendered (CPL 310.50 [3]; People v Calderon, 113 AD2d 894, 896, lv denied 67 NY2d 881).

The court did not abuse its discretion in its Sandoval ruling which permitted defendant to be cross-examined on the acts underlying two prior burglaries for which he had been adjudicated a youthful offender (see, People v Greer, 42 NY2d 170, 176; People v Duffy, 36 NY2d 258, 264, cert denied 423 US 861; People v Markidis, 142 AD2d 990, lv denied 72 NY2d 921). (Appeal from judgment of Wayne County Court, Parenti, J.— burglary, third degree, and other charges.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 A.D.2d 943, 540 N.Y.S.2d 228, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5956, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lamb-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack