People v. Rice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rice

122 A.D.2d 860, 505 N.Y.S.2d 726, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59353

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

DecidedAugust 11, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 122 A.D.2d 860 (People v. Rice) 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. Rice, 122 A.D.2d 860, 505 N.Y.S.2d 726, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59353 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Dwyer, J.), rendered October 19, 1980, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Brennan, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which sought suppression of statements.

Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of «attempted murder in the second degree, vacating the sentence imposed thereon, and dismissing that count of the indictment. As so modified, judgment affirmed.

The defendant raises the same issues which were raised by his codefendants in their appeals to this court (People v Dean, 112 AD2d 947). As we held in Dean, the People failed to prove that the defendant had the necessary intent to kill the McDonald’s employee who was shot during this robbery and therefore, the attempted murder conviction must be reversed.

The hearing court did not abuse its discretion in crediting the People’s witnesses and finding that the statements were made voluntarily. Accordingly, its findings should be upheld (People v Armstead, 98 AD2d 726).

The defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Dwyer, J.), rendered October 19, 1980, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Brennan, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which sought suppression of statements.

Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of «attempted murder in the second degree, vacating the sentence imposed thereon, and dismissing that count of the indictment. As so modified, judgment affirmed.

The defendant raises the same issues which were raised by his codefendants in their appeals to this court (People v Dean, 112 AD2d 947). As we held in Dean, the People failed to prove that the defendant had the necessary intent to kill the McDonald’s employee who was shot during this robbery and therefore, the attempted murder conviction must be reversed.

The hearing court did not abuse its discretion in crediting the People’s witnesses and finding that the statements were made voluntarily. Accordingly, its findings should be upheld (People v Armstead, 98 AD2d 726).

The defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 A.D.2d 860, 505 N.Y.S.2d 726, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rice-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack