People v. Tate (Earl)
This text of People v. Tate (Earl) (People v. Tate (Earl)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
against
Earl Tate, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Alexander M. Tisch, J.), rendered December 9, 2013, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of assault in the third degree, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Alexander M. Tisch, J.), rendered December 9, 2013, affirmed.
Defendant argues that the accusatory instrument was jurisdictionally defective as to the third-degree assault charge (Penal Law § 120.00) to which he pleaded guilty. Significantly, however, the only relief defendant requests is dismissal of the entire accusatory instrument. Since it cannot be said that no penological purpose would be served by remanding the matter to Criminal Court for further proceedings on the remaining class A misdemeanor offense (forcible touching) charged therein (see People v Allen, 39 NY2d 916, 918 [1976]), dismissal is not warranted and therefore we affirm on this basis.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: September 21, 2018
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
People v. Tate (Earl), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tate-earl-nyappterm-2018.