People v. Schroeder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Schroeder

104 A.D.2d 1055, 481 N.Y.S.2d 117, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20500

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 29, 1984·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Vaughn, J.), rendered August 23, 1983, convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree and resisting arrest, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

[1056]*1056Judgment affirmed, and case remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5).

A review of the record reveals that the People proved defendant’s guilt of every element of criminal mischief in the third degree (Penal Law, § 145.05) beyond a reasonable doubt and that the proof adduced to meet the $250 figure set forth in section 145.05 of the Penal Law was sufficient. We also conclude that defendant received a fair trial and effective representation within the meaning of the Constitution (see People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394, 399-400; People v Morris, 100 AD2d 630, 631; People v Abdullah, 100 AD2d 550, 551). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Vaughn, J.), rendered August 23, 1983, convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree and resisting arrest, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

[1056]*1056Judgment affirmed, and case remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5).

A review of the record reveals that the People proved defendant’s guilt of every element of criminal mischief in the third degree (Penal Law, § 145.05) beyond a reasonable doubt and that the proof adduced to meet the $250 figure set forth in section 145.05 of the Penal Law was sufficient. We also conclude that defendant received a fair trial and effective representation within the meaning of the Constitution (see People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394, 399-400; People v Morris, 100 AD2d 630, 631; People v Abdullah, 100 AD2d 550, 551). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

People v. Schroeder, 104 A.D.2d 1055, 481 N.Y.S.2d 117, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20500 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

104 A.D.2d 1055 (People v. Schroeder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related