People v. Noniashvili

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Noniashvili

285 A.D.2d 657, 728 N.Y.S.2d 392, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7728

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

DecidedJuly 30, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 285 A.D.2d 657 (People v. Noniashvili) 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. Noniashvili, 285 A.D.2d 657, 728 N.Y.S.2d 392, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7728 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), rendered September 22, 1999, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, assault in the second degree, aggravated criminal contempt, and criminal contempt in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the People’s case rested solely on the theory that he had unlawfully entered into a dwelling, and that it was therefore reversible error for the Supreme Court to charge the jury on the portion of Penal Law § 140.30 which imposes liability for “remain [ing] unlawfully” there (see, People v Gaines, 74 NY2d 358). This contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Lipton, 54 NY2d 340; People v Lafond, 213 AD2d 678) and, in any event, is without merit.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit or do not require reversal. Krausman, J. P., McGinity, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), rendered September 22, 1999, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, assault in the second degree, aggravated criminal contempt, and criminal contempt in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the People’s case rested solely on the theory that he had unlawfully entered into a dwelling, and that it was therefore reversible error for the Supreme Court to charge the jury on the portion of Penal Law § 140.30 which imposes liability for “remain [ing] unlawfully” there (see, People v Gaines, 74 NY2d 358). This contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Lipton, 54 NY2d 340; People v Lafond, 213 AD2d 678) and, in any event, is without merit.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit or do not require reversal. Krausman, J. P., McGinity, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D.2d 657, 728 N.Y.S.2d 392, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-noniashvili-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack