People v. Perez (Maximo)
This text of People v. Perez (Maximo) (People v. Perez (Maximo)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
against
Maximo Perez, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Joanne D. Quinones, J.), rendered September 5, 2012, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of disorderly conduct, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Joanne D. Quinones, J.), rendered September 5, 2012, reversed, on the law, and the accusatory instrument dismissed.
The accusatory instrument was jurisdictionally defective. A required element of the crime of criminal possession of a firearm (Penal Law § 265.01[1]) is that such weapon be operable (see People v Longshore, 86 NY2d 851, 852 [1995]; Matter of Rodney J., 83 NY2d 503 [1994]). Absent from the accusatory instrument and supporting depositions are any allegations that the "unloaded" gun recovered from "inside of a safety deposit box" belonging to defendant was operable. Since the instrument fails to allege an element of the offense charged, it is jurisdictionally defective and must be dismissed (see People v Kalin, 12 NY3d 225, 228-229 [2009]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: May 17, 2019
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
People v. Perez (Maximo), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-perez-maximo-nyappterm-2019.