The People v. Eugene Francis
This text of The People v. Eugene Francis (The People v. Eugene Francis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 222 SSM 31 The People &c., Respondent, v. Eugene Francis, Appellant.
Submitted by Andrew W. Sayegh, for appellant. Submitted by Laurie Sapakoff, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM: The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Supreme Court had jurisdiction over the case when it corrected an error in a decision issued one day prior based on an objective fact and thereby reinstated certain counts of defendant's
- 1 - - 2 - SSM 31
indictment. Accordingly, there is no basis to disturb the judgment entered upon defendant's guilty plea. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, in a memorandum. Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur. Chief Judge DiFiore took no part.
Decided November 17, 2016
- 2 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
The People v. Eugene Francis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-people-v-eugene-francis-ny-2016.