People v. McCummings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McCummings

64 A.D.2d 566, 407 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12319

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

DecidedJuly 13, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 64 A.D.2d 566 (People v. McCummings) 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. McCummings, 64 A.D.2d 566, 407 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12319 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered June 27, 1974, convicting defendant after jury trial of robbery, second degree, and petit larceny, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of reversing the conviction on the petit larceny count and dismissing that count, and otherwise affirmed. Defendant, on the facts of this case, could not have committed the robbery in the second degree without also committing the petit larceny said count being inclusory and concurrent (People v Anderson, 60 AD2d 530). "Where the verdict is comprised of inclusory concurrent counts a verdict of guilty on the greatest count is deemed a dismissal of every lesser count (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]).” (People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847, 848.) We have examined the other points urged by appellant and find them without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Birns, Fein and Lane, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered June 27, 1974, convicting defendant after jury trial of robbery, second degree, and petit larceny, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of reversing the conviction on the petit larceny count and dismissing that count, and otherwise affirmed. Defendant, on the facts of this case, could not have committed the robbery in the second degree without also committing the petit larceny said count being inclusory and concurrent (People v Anderson, 60 AD2d 530). "Where the verdict is comprised of inclusory concurrent counts a verdict of guilty on the greatest count is deemed a dismissal of every lesser count (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]).” (People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847, 848.) We have examined the other points urged by appellant and find them without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Lupiano, Birns, Fein and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 566, 407 N.Y.S.2d 487, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mccummings-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack