People v. Swindell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Swindell

50 A.D.2d 940, 377 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11881

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 940 (People v. Swindell) 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. Swindell, 50 A.D.2d 940, 377 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 21, 1972, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the third degree, assault in the second degree and attempted assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of grand larceny in the third degree and the sentence thereon and the count is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed. Under the facts of this case, defendant could not have committed robbery in the first degree without having also committed grand larceny in the third degree. Therefore, the guilty verdict on the count for robbery in the first degree required dismissal of the grand larceny count (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]; People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847; People v Sistrunk, 46 AD2d 914; People v Pyles, 44 AD2d 784). We have reviewed the other arguments raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Brennan, Munder and Shapiro, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered August 21, 1972, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the third degree, assault in the second degree and attempted assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of grand larceny in the third degree and the sentence thereon and the count is dismissed. As so modified, judgment affirmed. Under the facts of this case, defendant could not have committed robbery in the first degree without having also committed grand larceny in the third degree. Therefore, the guilty verdict on the count for robbery in the first degree required dismissal of the grand larceny count (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]; People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847; People v Sistrunk, 46 AD2d 914; People v Pyles, 44 AD2d 784). We have reviewed the other arguments raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Brennan, Munder and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 940, 377 N.Y.S.2d 194, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-swindell-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack