People v. Rosner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rosner

185 A.D.2d 686, 587 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9240

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

DecidedJuly 14, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 185 A.D.2d 686 (People v. Rosner) 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. Rosner, 185 A.D.2d 686, 587 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9240 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant’s contention that the court erred in ordering a joint trial with separate juries rather than separate trials. Defendant’s primary argument is that the court, by failing to direct separate trials, effectively deprived him of the benefit of a plea offer that would have resulted in a sentence of 20 years to life rather than the 25 years to life he received. The plea offer was part of a plea negotiation; it was not available unless accepted by both defendants. The codefendant chose to proceed to trial and the plea offer was withdrawn. Defendant had a right to plead to the full indictment (see, People v Bradley, [appeal No. 1], 184 AD2d 1041; CPL 220.10 [2]), but not to anything less without the consent of the People (see, CPL 220.10 [2], [3]).

We have reviewed the other contentions raised by defendant and find that they were unpreserved or without merit. (Appeal [687]*687from Judgment of Genesee County Court, Morton, J.—Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Boomer, J. P., Green, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant’s contention that the court erred in ordering a joint trial with separate juries rather than separate trials. Defendant’s primary argument is that the court, by failing to direct separate trials, effectively deprived him of the benefit of a plea offer that would have resulted in a sentence of 20 years to life rather than the 25 years to life he received. The plea offer was part of a plea negotiation; it was not available unless accepted by both defendants. The codefendant chose to proceed to trial and the plea offer was withdrawn. Defendant had a right to plead to the full indictment (see, People v Bradley, [appeal No. 1], 184 AD2d 1041; CPL 220.10 [2]), but not to anything less without the consent of the People (see, CPL 220.10 [2], [3]).

We have reviewed the other contentions raised by defendant and find that they were unpreserved or without merit. (Appeal [687]*687from Judgment of Genesee County Court, Morton, J.—Murder, 2nd Degree.) Present—Boomer, J. P., Green, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 A.D.2d 686, 587 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rosner-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack