People v. Quezada

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Quezada

294 A.D.2d 175, 741 N.Y.S.2d 681, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4989

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

DecidedMay 14, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 175 (People v. Quezada) 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. Quezada, 294 A.D.2d 175, 741 N.Y.S.2d 681, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.), rendered March 12, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in granting the People’s motion for consolidation pursuant to CPL 200.20 (2) (c). Joinder of charges relating to separate incidents was proper since the crimes charged are defined by similar statutory provisions (see, People v Gardner, 186 AD2d 818, lv denied 81 NY2d 839). Specifically, each robbery count included an element in common with at least one element of the assault [176]*176charge. Moreover, defendant was not prejudiced by the consolidation. There was overwhelming evidence supporting the assault charge of which he was convicted, and he was acquitted of the charges relating to the robbery incident.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find no basis for reversal. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Bradley, J.), rendered March 12, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in granting the People’s motion for consolidation pursuant to CPL 200.20 (2) (c). Joinder of charges relating to separate incidents was proper since the crimes charged are defined by similar statutory provisions (see, People v Gardner, 186 AD2d 818, lv denied 81 NY2d 839). Specifically, each robbery count included an element in common with at least one element of the assault [176]*176charge. Moreover, defendant was not prejudiced by the consolidation. There was overwhelming evidence supporting the assault charge of which he was convicted, and he was acquitted of the charges relating to the robbery incident.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find no basis for reversal. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 175, 741 N.Y.S.2d 681, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-quezada-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack