People v. Short

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Short

69 A.D.2d 985, 416 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11754

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

DecidedApril 6, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 69 A.D.2d 985 (People v. Short) 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. Short, 69 A.D.2d 985, 416 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, insofar as it imposes sentence, unanimously [986]*986modified to provide that the sentences shall be served concurrently, and otherwise judgment affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of criminal facilitation in the second degree (Penal Law, § 115.00 [former]) and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (Penal Law, § 165.40) as lesser included crimes under counts in the indictment charging, respectively, burglary in the second degree and robbery in the first degree. He was sentenced to a one-year term of imprisonment on each count, to be served consecutively. Although defendant could properly be convicted of both crimes (Penal Law, § 165.60, subd 2), the imposition of consecutive sentences was improper (see Hechtman, Supplementary Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 39, Penal Law § 165.60 [Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, 1978-1979], p 48). The crimes charged in the indictment were part of a single transaction or event, and thus the sentences must run concurrently (Penal Law, § 70.25, subd 2). (Appeal from judgment of Erie Supreme Court—criminal facilitation, second degree, etc.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Doerr and Moule, JJ.

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

Judgment, insofar as it imposes sentence, unanimously [986]*986modified to provide that the sentences shall be served concurrently, and otherwise judgment affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of criminal facilitation in the second degree (Penal Law, § 115.00 [former]) and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (Penal Law, § 165.40) as lesser included crimes under counts in the indictment charging, respectively, burglary in the second degree and robbery in the first degree. He was sentenced to a one-year term of imprisonment on each count, to be served consecutively. Although defendant could properly be convicted of both crimes (Penal Law, § 165.60, subd 2), the imposition of consecutive sentences was improper (see Hechtman, Supplementary Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 39, Penal Law § 165.60 [Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, 1978-1979], p 48). The crimes charged in the indictment were part of a single transaction or event, and thus the sentences must run concurrently (Penal Law, § 70.25, subd 2). (Appeal from judgment of Erie Supreme Court—criminal facilitation, second degree, etc.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Doerr and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 A.D.2d 985, 416 N.Y.S.2d 118, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-short-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack