People v. Flowers
| Decision Date | 11 July 2012 |
| Citation | 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 05545,97 A.D.3d 693,947 N.Y.S.2d 886 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Immanuel FLOWERS, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Denise A. Corsi of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Sholom J. Twersky, and Kaye Scholer LLP [Gerald Derevyanny], of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered December 7, 2009, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the sentence imposed; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of his right to the effective assistance of counsel, since the record as a whole demonstrates that he received meaningful representation ( see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712–713, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584;People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400;cf. People v. Cyrus, 48 A.D.3d 150, 159–161, 848 N.Y.S.2d 67).
However, the remarks of the sentencing court demonstrated that it improperly considered a crime that was dismissed at trial for lack of legally sufficient evidence as a basis for sentencing ( see People v. Grant, 94 A.D.3d 1139, 1141–1142, 942 N.Y.S.2d 223;People v. Harvey, 76 A.D.3d 605, 606, 905 N.Y.S.2d 514;People v. Pacquette, 73 A.D.3d 1088, 900 N.Y.S.2d 683,affd.17 N.Y.3d 87, 926 N.Y.S.2d 856, 950 N.E.2d 489;People v. Romero, 71 A.D.3d 795, 796, 896 N.Y.S.2d 417;People v. Schrader, 23 A.D.3d 585, 585–586, 806 N.Y.S.2d 613). Accordingly, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Lawrence
...v. Lipford, 129 A.D.3d 1528, 1531, 11 N.Y.S.3d 763, lv. denied 26 N.Y.3d 1041, 22 N.Y.S.3d 170, 43 N.E.3d 380 ; cf. People v. Flowers, 97 A.D.3d 693, 693, 947 N.Y.S.2d 886, lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 1102, 955 N.Y.S.2d 557, 979 N.E.2d 818 ). We reject defendant's contention that the sentence is u......
-
People v. Fews
...the Supreme Court improperly considered a crime of which the defendant was acquitted as a basis for sentencing (see People v. Flowers, 97 A.D.3d 693, 693, 947 N.Y.S.2d 886 ; People v. Harvey, 76 A.D.3d 605, 606, 905 N.Y.S.2d 514 ; People v. Pacquette, 73 A.D.3d 1088, 900 N.Y.S.2d 683, affd.......
- People v. Jackson
-
People v. Newman
...remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing (see People v. Brown, 113 A.D.3d 785, 978 N.Y.S.2d 862 ; People v. Flowers, 97 A.D.3d 693, 947 N.Y.S.2d 886 ; People v. Grant, 94 A.D.3d 1139, 942 N.Y.S.2d 223 ). Further, since the People failed to establish that the acts underl......