People v. Riale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Riale

274 A.D.2d 970, 711 N.Y.S.2d 654

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

DecidedJuly 7, 2000

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

This text of 274 A.D.2d 970 (People v. Riale) 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. Riale, 274 A.D.2d 970, 711 N.Y.S.2d 654 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously reversed as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and new trial granted. Memorandum: County Court erred in denying defendant’s Sandoval motion with respect to a prior forgery conviction on the ground that defendant “waived” or “forfeited” that motion by asserting an agency defense. The record establishes that defendant never asserted an agency defense. In any event, that defense has no application to the crimes of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25), grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law § 155.35) and grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30 [1]), which are charged herein (see, People v Andujas, 79 NY2d 113, 117). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Hafner, Jr., J. — Criminal Possession Forged Instrument, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Pine, Wisner, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously reversed as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and new trial granted. Memorandum: County Court erred in denying defendant’s Sandoval motion with respect to a prior forgery conviction on the ground that defendant “waived” or “forfeited” that motion by asserting an agency defense. The record establishes that defendant never asserted an agency defense. In any event, that defense has no application to the crimes of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25), grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law § 155.35) and grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30 [1]), which are charged herein (see, People v Andujas, 79 NY2d 113, 117). (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Hafner, Jr., J. — Criminal Possession Forged Instrument, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Pine, Wisner, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 A.D.2d 970, 711 N.Y.S.2d 654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-riale-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack