People v. Savage

176 A.D.2d 831
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 15, 1991
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 176 A.D.2d 831 (People v. Savage) 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. Savage, 176 A.D.2d 831 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

— Appeals by the defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the County Court, Nassau County (Delin, J.), both rendered February 20, 1990, convicting each of them of owning or operating an independent clinical laboratory without obtaining a permit in violation of Public Health Law § 574 (1), and accepting a specimen for laboratory examination without obtaining a valid permit in [832]*832violation of Public Health Law § 574 (1), upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed, and the matters are remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50.

The defendants contend that their convictions for accepting a specimen for laboratory examination without a permit (see, Public Health Law § 574 [1]) did not constitute a crime. We disagree. Inasmuch as the punishment for violating Public Health Law § 574 (1) is not otherwise prescribed by the Public Health Law "or any other law, [it] is punishable by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars or by both” (Public Health Law § 12-b [2]). Accordingly, it is deemed an "unclassified misdemeanor” (Penal Law § 55.10 [2] [c]; 31 NY Jur 2d, Criminal Law, § 281, n 82, at 485).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to prove the defendants’ guilt of violating Public Health Law § 574 (1) — owning or operating an independent clinical laboratory without a permit — beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have considered the defendants’ remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken and Copertino, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Savage v. Hamburg
194 A.D.2d 441 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
176 A.D.2d 831, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-savage-nyappdiv-1991.