People v. Curtis

Decision Date31 October 1988
Citation143 A.D.2d 1030,533 N.Y.S.2d 582
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. William CURTIS, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

J. Mitchell Rosenberg, Brooklyn, for appellant.

Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Richard T Faughnan and Nicoletta J. Caferri, of counsel), for respondent.

Before EIBER, J.P., and KOOPER, SPATT and HARWOOD, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik J.), rendered April 4, 1985, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The police intervened in a dispute between the defendant and his girlfriend. A gun was recovered after a policeman saw the defendant throw it under a bed in the couple's apartment.

The defendant claims error in the admission into evidence of testimony by his girlfriend's son who reported seeing the defendant possess a gun on previous occasions. Contrary to the defendant's claim, this testimony was admissible in that it constituted proof of the continuous crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. As noted in Matter of Johnson v. Morgenthau, 69 N.Y.2d 148, 512 N.Y.S.2d 797, 505 N.E.2d 240, continual possession of a weapon is only one crime. Unless there is an intermittent abandonment, a continuing offense such as long-term possession of a weapon can support only one prosecution. Therefore, the witness's testimony did not relate to previous uncharged crimes but to the one for which the defendant was being prosecuted.

The defendant also challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence against him and alleges that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15[5] ).

The defendant also claims he should be given jail-time credit for time he served in California. This issue is not properly before this court on direct appeal of his conviction (CPL 450.10, et seq.). The proper remedy is by way of a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • People v. Brown
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • July 29, 1993
    ...in the indictment but part of the continuous crime are not considered "uncharged crimes" for Molineux purposes (People v. Curtis, 143 A.D.2d 1030, 533 N.Y.S.2d 582, lv. denied, 73 N.Y.2d 890, 538 N.Y.S.2d 803, 535 N.E.2d 4. Double Jeopardy--The Constitution prohibits more than one prosecuti......
  • People v. Lawson
    • United States
    • New York Criminal Court
    • April 30, 2019
    ...to be continuing crimes, albeit for double jeopardy and conspiracy purposes (see Matter of Johnson, id. ; People v. Curtis, 143 A.D.2d 1030, 533 N.Y.S.2d 582 [2d Dept. 1988] ; People v. Carvajal, 6 N.Y.3d 305, 812 N.Y.S.2d 395, 845 N.E.2d 1225 [2005] ). Those cases are germane, however, bec......
  • People v. Paulin
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • May 9, 2018
    ...v. Person, 256 A.D.2d 1232, 1232–1233, 684 N.Y.S.2d 367 ; People v. Searor, 163 A.D.2d 824, 559 N.Y.S.2d 840 ; People v. Curtis, 143 A.D.2d 1030, 1030, 533 N.Y.S.2d 582 ; People v. Vivenzio, 103 A.D.2d 1044, 1045, 478 N.Y.S.2d 438 ; People v. Walters, 91 A.D.2d 843, 458 N.Y.S.2d 400 ; Peopl......
  • People v. Fornal
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 6, 1995
    ...appeal from the judgment of conviction, as it does not affect the propriety of the defendant's sentence (see, e.g., People v. Curtis, 143 A.D.2d 1030, 533 N.Y.S.2d 582; People v. Walters, 91 A.D.2d 843, 458 N.Y.S.2d 400). The defendant's remedy, if she be so advised, is a proceeding pursuan......
  • 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