People v. Christie
| Citation | 210 A.D.2d 497,620 N.Y.S.2d 990 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. David CHRISTIE, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 27 December 1994 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Steven N. Feinman, White Plains, for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Anthea H. Bruffee, and Ben Niderberg, of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant (1) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J.), rendered March 3, 1992, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 1184/91, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) from an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered March 3, 1992, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court (Curci, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 10019/88.
ORDERED that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly amended Indictment No. 1184/91 to read that the defendant and his codefendant not only acted in concert with each other, but that they also acted in concert with others. The amendment neither changed the theory of the People's case nor prejudiced the defendant (see, People v. Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630, 612 N.Y.S.2d 350, 634 N.E.2d 951; People v. McEachin, 188 A.D.2d 433, 591 N.Y.S.2d 1023; People v. Roseboro, 182 A.D.2d 784, 582 N.Y.S.2d 780; People v. Gaskin, 184 A.D.2d 525, 586 N.Y.S.2d 753).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions, including the issue of whether the defendant's sentence is excessive, and find them to be without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Allen
...not only acted in concert with a named codefendant, but also that he may have acted in concert with “others” ( see People v. Christie, 210 A.D.2d 497, 497, 620 N.Y.S.2d 990;see also People v. Dorfeuille, 91 A.D.3d 1023, 1023–1024, 936 N.Y.S.2d 377,lv. denied19 N.Y.3d 996, 951 N.Y.S.2d 472, ......
-
People v. Hyland, 2017–00894
...that he acted with another to commit a robbery (see CPL 200.70 ; People v. Davis, 273 A.D.2d 476, 712 N.Y.S.2d 363 ; People v. Christie, 210 A.D.2d 497, 620 N.Y.S.2d 990 ; People v. Roseboro, 182 A.D.2d 784, 785, 582 N.Y.S.2d 780 ; People v. Budhai, 182 A.D.2d 693, 582 N.Y.S.2d 730 ). DILLO......
- People v. Cox
-
People v. Bull
...case or unduly prejudice the defendant (see CPL 200.70[1] ; People v. Hyland, 168 A.D.3d 1096, 92 N.Y.S.3d 412 ; People v. Christie, 210 A.D.2d 497, 620 N.Y.S.2d 990 ).The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).The defendant's remaining co......