People v. Price

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Price

53 A.D.2d 702, 385 N.Y.S.2d 110, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13465

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

DecidedJune 28, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 53 A.D.2d 702 (People v. Price) 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. Price, 53 A.D.2d 702, 385 N.Y.S.2d 110, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13465 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered November 25, 1974, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, burglary in the third degree, attempted petit larceny, criminal mischief in the fourth degree and resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of burglary in the third degree, and the sentence imposed thereon, and the said count is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed. The appeal did not bring the fact findings up for review. Under the facts of this case, defendant could not have committed burglary in the [703]*703second degree without having also committed burglary in the third degree. Therefore, the guilty verdict on the count of burglary in the second degree required dismissal of the lesser count of burglary in the third degree (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]; People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847; People v Sistrunk, 46 AD2d 914). We have reviewed the other arguments raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Titone and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, rendered November 25, 1974, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, burglary in the third degree, attempted petit larceny, criminal mischief in the fourth degree and resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of burglary in the third degree, and the sentence imposed thereon, and the said count is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed. The appeal did not bring the fact findings up for review. Under the facts of this case, defendant could not have committed burglary in the [703]*703second degree without having also committed burglary in the third degree. Therefore, the guilty verdict on the count of burglary in the second degree required dismissal of the lesser count of burglary in the third degree (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]; People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847; People v Sistrunk, 46 AD2d 914). We have reviewed the other arguments raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Titone and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 A.D.2d 702, 385 N.Y.S.2d 110, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-price-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack