People v. Singleton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Singleton

207 A.D.2d 995, 617 N.Y.S.2d 691

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 207 A.D.2d 995 (People v. Singleton) 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. Singleton, 207 A.D.2d 995, 617 N.Y.S.2d 691 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to the contention that defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree is not supported by legally sufficient evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). By failing to challenge the jury verdict on the basis that the conviction for unlawful imprisonment merged with the other substantive crimes, defendant failed to preserve that issue for review (see, People v Salimi, 159 AD2d 658, lv denied 76 NY2d 742; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250, lv denied 74 NY2d 853). In any event, that issue is without merit because defendant’s restraint and asportation of complainant were not merely incidental to and inseparable from the acts that the People alleged constituted assault and rape (see, People v Salimi, supra; People v Masterson, 177 AD2d 1042, lv denied 79 NY2d 950; People v Plotter, 142 AD2d 939).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Contiguglia, J.—Assault, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Lawton, Wesley and Davis, 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 the contention that defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree is not supported by legally sufficient evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). By failing to challenge the jury verdict on the basis that the conviction for unlawful imprisonment merged with the other substantive crimes, defendant failed to preserve that issue for review (see, People v Salimi, 159 AD2d 658, lv denied 76 NY2d 742; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250, lv denied 74 NY2d 853). In any event, that issue is without merit because defendant’s restraint and asportation of complainant were not merely incidental to and inseparable from the acts that the People alleged constituted assault and rape (see, People v Salimi, supra; People v Masterson, 177 AD2d 1042, lv denied 79 NY2d 950; People v Plotter, 142 AD2d 939).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Contiguglia, J.—Assault, 2nd Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Lawton, Wesley and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 995, 617 N.Y.S.2d 691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-singleton-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack