People v. Hassin

Decision Date27 May 1975
CitationPeople v. Hassin, 48 A.D.2d 705, 368 N.Y.S.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph HASSIN, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

William E. Hellerstein and William J. Gallagher, New York City(Susan A. Powers, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Eugene Gold, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Elliott Schulder, Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondent.

Before RABIN, Acting P.J., and HOPKINS, MARTUSCELLO, LATHAM and CHRIST, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered March 19, 1973 and amended April 11, 1973, which, upon his plea of guilty, convicted and sentenced him as follows: (1) of two counts of attempted intentional murder and two counts of 'attempted' felony murder--12 years on each count; (2) of robbery in the first degree--5 years; (3) of grand larceny in the third degree--4 years; (4) of two counts of assault in the first degree--3 years on each count; (5) of attempted assault in the first degree--1 year; and (6) of possession of a weapon as a felony--3 years, all the sentences to run concurrently.

Judgment reversed, on the law, insofar as it convicted and sentenced defendant for 'attempted' felony murder upon the second and eighth counts and said counts dismissed; and, as to the remaining counts, judgment affirmed as to the convictions, but reversed, on the law, as to the sentences and case remanded to the sentencing court for resentencing in accordance with section 70.00 of the Penal Law.

The appeal is timely, having been interposed within 30 days after the rendition of the amended sentence.

The sentencing court had no authority to impose definite sentences under section 70.00 of the Penal Law.We are remanding this case to the sentencing court for imposition of indefinite terms or appropriate minimum and maximum terms as prescribed by the Penal Law.

As to the second and eighth counts, there is no such crime as 'attempted' felony murder, because an attempt requires an intent to commit a specific crime.One cannot attempt to commit an act which one does not intend to commit (People v. Falu, 37 A.D.2d 1025, 325 N.Y.S.2d 798;People v. Brown, 21 A.D.2d 738, 249 N.Y.S.2d 922).Felony murder is not an intentional crime; it is a legislative creature to make felons strictly responsible for all consequences of their felonies, whatever their intentions or the intentions of their confederates.Accordingly, an indictment charging attempted felony...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
25 cases
  • Duffy v. State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • December 5, 1986
    ...remain in prison for any definite period of time," citing People v. Tower, 308 N.Y. 123, 123 N.E.2d 805 (1954); People v. Hassin, 48 A.D.2d 705, 368 N.Y.S.2d 253 (1975); Pennsylvania: Commissioner v. Marshall, 254 Pa.Super. 275, 385 A.2d 1017 (1978); Texas: Thomas v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 587......
  • Goodson v. Com.
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • March 12, 1996
    ...v. Price, 104 N.M. 703, 726 P.2d 857, 858-60 (Ct.App.), cert. quashed, 104 N.M. 702, 726 P.2d 856 (1986); People v. Hassin, 48 A.D.2d 705, 368 N.Y.S.2d 253, 254 (N.Y.App.Div.1975); State v. Bell, 785 P.2d 390, 392-94 (Utah 1989). Additionally, many states limit the application of the felony......
  • Bruce v. State
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • November 28, 1989
    ...736 (1984),cert. denied, 101 N.J. 226, 501 A.2d 905 (1985); State v. Price, 104 N.M. 703, 726 P.2d 857 (1986); People v. Hassin, 48 A.D.2d 705, 368 N.Y.S.2d 253, 254 (1975); Commonwealth v. Griffin, 310 Pa.Super. 39, 456 A.2d 171, 177-78 (1983); State v. Maestas, 652 P.2d 903, 904 (Utah In ......
  • People v. Campbell
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • November 29, 1988
    ...v. Hendrix, 56 A.D.2d 580, 391 N.Y.S.2d 186, affd. on other grounds 44 N.Y.2d 658, 405 N.Y.S.2d 31, 376 N.E.2d 192; People v. Hassin, 48 A.D.2d 705, 368 N.Y.S.2d 253; see also, Donnino, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons.Laws of N.Y., Book 39, Penal Law § 110.00, at Similar reasoning wa......
  • Get Started for Free