People v. Swain

309 A.D.2d 1173, 764 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10054
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 2, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 309 A.D.2d 1173 (People v. Swain) 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. Swain, 309 A.D.2d 1173, 764 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of Erie County Court (McCarthy, J.), entered April 27, 2001, convicting defendant after a jury trial of welfare fraud in the fifth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by providing that the amount of restitution to be paid by defendant is $825.24 and as modified the judgment is affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of welfare fraud in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 158.05) and offering a false instrument for filing [1174]*1174in the first degree (§ 175.35), based on his having failed to report that he had received unemployment insurance benefits when he applied for recertification of public assistance benefits on December 3, 1999. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the evidence is legally sufficient to support the conviction and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence, despite the absence of direct proof of defendant’s intent to defraud. Defendant’s intent may be readily inferred “from defendant’s conduct and the surrounding circumstances” (People v Snyder, 306 AD2d 949, 949 [2003]; see generally People v Gianni, 303 AD2d 1012 [2003]). County Court erred, however, in ordering defendant to pay restitution in the amount of $1,000. Defendant was convicted of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree based on his application for recertification of public assistance benefits on December 3, 1999, and the total amount of the public assistance benefits received by defendant after that date is $825.24. We therefore modify the judgment by providing that the amount of restitution to be paid by defendant is $825.24. Present — Green, J.P., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Nunez
2018 NY Slip Op 2687 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Rafferty
2017 NY Slip Op 7797 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Norman
2017 NY Slip Op 7490 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
309 A.D.2d 1173, 764 N.Y.S.2d 896, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-swain-nyappdiv-2003.