People v. Bulgin

Decision Date16 April 2013
Citation964 N.Y.S.2d 19,105 A.D.3d 551,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 02513
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Delroy BULGIN, Defendant–Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Susan H. Salomon of counsel), for appellant.

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Emily Anne Aldridge of counsel), for respondent.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., DeGRASSE, ABDUS–SALAAM, MANZANET–DANIELS, CLARK, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic R. Massaro, J.), rendered March 29, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal mischief in the second degree and criminal contempt in the first degree, and sentencing him to time served and a conditional discharge, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the contempt conviction and dismissing that count of the indictment, and otherwise affirmed.

The People failed to prove that defendant had written or oral notice of an order of protection and its contents, as required for a conviction of criminal contempt in the first degree ( People v. McCowan, 85 N.Y.2d 985, 987, 629 N.Y.S.2d 163, 652 N.E.2d 909 [1995];Penal Law § 215.51[d] ). While the order contained check marks of unidentified origin indicating that defendant was present in court and was advised of the “issuance” of the order, defendant's signature was not on the order ( compare People v. Inserra, 4 N.Y.3d 30, 31–33, 790 N.Y.S.2d 72, 823 N.E.2d 437 [2004];People v. D'Angelo, 284 A.D.2d 146, 146, 728 N.Y.S.2d 132 [1st Dept. 2001], affd.98 N.Y.2d 733, 750 N.Y.S.2d 811, 780 N.E.2d 496 [2002] ), and there was no evidence establishing that defendant was present in court and orally advised of the prohibited conduct ( compare People v. Clark, 95 N.Y.2d 773, 710 N.Y.S.2d 297, 731 N.E.2d 1105 [2000] ).

Contrary to defendant's assertions, there was no spillover error onto the criminal mischief conviction. There is no reasonable possibility that the contempt count influenced the guilty verdict on the criminal mischief count in any meaningful way ( see People v. Concepcion, 17 N.Y.3d 192, 197, 929 N.Y.S.2d 541, 953 N.E.2d 779 [2011];People v. Daly, 14 N.Y.3d 848, 902 N.Y.S.2d 499, 928 N.E.2d 683 [2010] ). Both convictions stemmed from the same incident, in which defendant intentionally sideswiped and damaged the victim's van while she and her fiancé were inside. However, proof of defendant's guilt of criminal mischief had...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Hurdle v. Sheahan
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • December 30, 2013
    ...resulting in dismissal of drug count, did not require new trial on weapons possession and assault charges); People v. Bulgin, 105 A.D.3d 551, 964 N.Y.S.2d 19, 21 (1st Dep't 2013) (upon vacating one count, court found that "there was no spillover error onto the criminal mischief conviction. ......
  • People v. Williams
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • June 13, 2014
    ...( People v. Soler, 52 A.D.3d 938, 940, 859 N.Y.S.2d 514,lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 741, 864 N.Y.S.2d 400, 894 N.E.2d 664;cf. People v. Bulgin, 105 A.D.3d 551, 551, 964 N.Y.S.2d 19,lv. denied21 N.Y.3d 1002, 971 N.Y.S.2d 254, 993 N.E.2d 1276). Defendant's contention that the order of protection was ......
  • People v. Lawrence
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 26, 2021
    ...Sinha , 19 N.Y.3d 932, 934, 951 N.Y.S.2d 697, 976 N.E.2d 223 [2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Bulgin , 105 A.D.3d 551, 551, 964 N.Y.S.2d 19 [1st Dept. 2013], lv denied 21 N.Y.3d 1002, 971 N.Y.S.2d 254, 993 N.E.2d 1276 [2013] ). Defendant additionally contends in his ......
  • Lobb v. Nanetti
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 24, 2021
    ...temporary order of protection or made aware of its contents (see People v. John, 150 A.D.3d 889, 53 N.Y.S.3d 377 ; People v. Bulgin, 105 A.D.3d 551, 964 N.Y.S.2d 19 ). We note that the transcript of the proceeding where the subject temporary order of protection was issued was not admitted i......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT