People v. Moses

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Moses

19 A.D.3d 248, 798 N.Y.S.2d 12

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

DecidedJune 21, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 248 (People v. Moses) 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. Moses, 19 A.D.3d 248, 798 N.Y.S.2d 12 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic R. Massaro, J.), rendered June 8, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of seven counts of criminal sale of a firearm in the [249]*249third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 6 years, consecutive to six consecutive terms of 1 to 3 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the DNA databank fee, and otherwise affirmed.

As the People concede, since the crime was committed before the effective date of the legislation providing for the imposition of a DNA databank fee (Penal Law § 60.35 [1] [a] [v] [former (1) (e)]), that fee should not have been imposed.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.E, Saxe, Marlow, Ellerin and Catterson, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic R. Massaro, J.), rendered June 8, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of seven counts of criminal sale of a firearm in the [249]*249third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 6 years, consecutive to six consecutive terms of 1 to 3 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the DNA databank fee, and otherwise affirmed.

As the People concede, since the crime was committed before the effective date of the legislation providing for the imposition of a DNA databank fee (Penal Law § 60.35 [1] [a] [v] [former (1) (e)]), that fee should not have been imposed.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.E, Saxe, Marlow, Ellerin and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 248, 798 N.Y.S.2d 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-moses-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack