People v. Tinsley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tinsley

65 A.D.2d 519, 409 N.Y.S.2d 223, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13100

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 65 A.D.2d 519 (People v. Tinsley) 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. Tinsley, 65 A.D.2d 519, 409 N.Y.S.2d 223, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13100 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered May 3, 1976, convicting defendant after jury trial of robbery in the third degree (two counts), burglary in the third degree, petit larceny and resisting arrest, unanimously modified, on the law, to dismiss the count of petit larceny, and otherwise affirmed. Defendant, on the facts of this case, could not have committed the robbery of Mrs. Silverman without also committing the petit larceny, the counts being inclusory and concurrent (CPL 300.30, subd 4; People v Stubbs, 51 AD2d 1063). "Where the verdict is comprised of inclusory concurrent counts a verdict of guilty on the greatest count is deemed a dismissal of every lesser count (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]).” (People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847, 848.) We have examined the other points raised by appellant and find them without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Lupiano, Evans, Lane and Sullivan, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered May 3, 1976, convicting defendant after jury trial of robbery in the third degree (two counts), burglary in the third degree, petit larceny and resisting arrest, unanimously modified, on the law, to dismiss the count of petit larceny, and otherwise affirmed. Defendant, on the facts of this case, could not have committed the robbery of Mrs. Silverman without also committing the petit larceny, the counts being inclusory and concurrent (CPL 300.30, subd 4; People v Stubbs, 51 AD2d 1063). "Where the verdict is comprised of inclusory concurrent counts a verdict of guilty on the greatest count is deemed a dismissal of every lesser count (CPL 300.40, subd 3, par [b]).” (People v Grier, 37 NY2d 847, 848.) We have examined the other points raised by appellant and find them without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Lupiano, Evans, Lane and Sullivan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 A.D.2d 519, 409 N.Y.S.2d 223, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tinsley-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack