People v. Phillips

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Phillips

124 A.D.3d 493, 998 N.Y.S.2d 622

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

DecidedJanuary 22, 2015

Docket13994 2513/09

StatusPublished

This text of 124 A.D.3d 493 (People v. Phillips) 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. Phillips, 124 A.D.3d 493, 998 N.Y.S.2d 622 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme *494 Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered January 31, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of arson in the second degree, criminal mischief in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 10 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence for the arson conviction to a term of seven years, resulting in a new aggregate term of seven years, and otherwise affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]). The circumstantial evidence, including a videotape of defendant’s actions at the time of the fire and evidence of his motive, supported the conclusion that he set the fire.

Defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). The record establishes that counsel advised defendant against testifying, but also advised him that the ultimate decision to testify was a decision to be made by defendant personally (see People v Perry, 266 AD2d 151, 152 [1st Dept 1999], lv denied 95 NY2d 856 [2000]).

We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.

Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Renwick, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme *494 Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered January 31, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of arson in the second degree, criminal mischief in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 10 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence for the arson conviction to a term of seven years, resulting in a new aggregate term of seven years, and otherwise affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]). The circumstantial evidence, including a videotape of defendant’s actions at the time of the fire and evidence of his motive, supported the conclusion that he set the fire.

Defendant received effective assistance under the state and federal standards (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). The record establishes that counsel advised defendant against testifying, but also advised him that the ultimate decision to testify was a decision to be made by defendant personally (see People v Perry, 266 AD2d 151, 152 [1st Dept 1999], lv denied 95 NY2d 856 [2000]).

We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.

Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Renwick, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 A.D.3d 493, 998 N.Y.S.2d 622, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-phillips-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack