People v. Molnar

234 A.D.2d 988, 652 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13764
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 30, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 988 (People v. Molnar) 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. Molnar, 234 A.D.2d 988, 652 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13764 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [1]) and two counts of attempted assault in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.05 [2], [7]), defendant contends that the verdict is not supported by legally sufficient evidence. That contention lacks merit. The record establishes that defendant used a pen and pencil in a menacing manner and attempted to stab an officer with the pen. Thus, we conclude that the pen and pencil constituted dangerous instruments because they were used "in a manner which renderfed them] readily capable of causing serious physical injury” (People v Carter, 53 NY2d 113, 116; see also, People v White, 167 AD2d 870, lv denied 77 NY2d 845). Contrary to [989]*989defendant’s contention, we also conclude that the evidence is legally sufficient to satisfy the requirement of intent to cause physical injury (see, People v Paris, 189 AD2d 589, lv denied 81 NY2d 975).

We conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495) and that the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. We have examined the issues raised by defendant in his pro se supplemental brief and conclude that they lack merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Oneida County Court, Mulroy, J.—Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Pine, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Tavarez
2024 NY Slip Op 24071 (Bronx Criminal Court, 2024)
People v. Brown
126 A.D.3d 516 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
In re Markquel S.
93 A.D.3d 505 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
WOODARD, JR., ALONZO, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
People v. Woodard
83 A.D.3d 1440 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Glenn Wallace v. John Nash, Warden
311 F.3d 140 (Second Circuit, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
234 A.D.2d 988, 652 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-molnar-nyappdiv-1996.