People v. Nemcow, 570250/19

CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM.
Citation155 N.Y.S.3d 518,73 Misc.3d 28
Decision Date12 October 2021
Docket Number570250/19
Parties The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Julius NEMCOW, Defendant-Appellant.

73 Misc.3d 28
155 N.Y.S.3d 518

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Julius NEMCOW, Defendant-Appellant.

570250/19

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York, First Department.

Decided on October 12, 2021


Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney (Franklin R. Guenthner of counsel), for respondent.

Center for Appellate Litigation (Benjamin Rutkin-Becker of counsel) for appellant.

PRESENT: Edmead, P.J., Brigantti, Hagler, JJ.

Per Curiam.

155 N.Y.S.3d 519
73 Misc.3d 29

Judgment of conviction (Anne J. Swern, J. on motion to dismiss; Herbert J. Moses, J., at trial and sentencing), rendered April 15, 2019, affirmed.

Penal law § 120.45(3) provides that a person is guilty of stalking in the fourth degree when he or she

"intentionally, and for no legitimate purpose, engages in a course of conduct directed at a specific person, and knows or reasonably should know that such conduct ... is likely to cause such person to reasonably fear that his or her employment, business or career is threatened, where such conduct consists of appearing,

telehoning or initiating communication or contact at such person's place of employment or business, and the actor was previously clearly informed to cease that conduct."

In enacting this statute,

"[t]he New York Legislature set up a standard of intent that does not require that the stalker have a specific intent to stalk, but rather that the stalker [for no legitimate purpose] intentionally engages in a course of conduct, which s/he knew or reasonably
73 Misc.3d 30
should have known ... is likely to cause such person to reasonably fear that his or her employment is threatened, where such conduct consists of appearing, telephoning or initiating communication or contact at such person's place of employment or business, and the actor was previously clearly informed to cease that conduct. This last, particularly bold, initiative was to provide within the statute recourse for victims who suffer employment, business or career consequences or reasonable fear in that regard, emanating from the conduct of the stalker"

(Demetra M. Pappas, Stopping New Yorkers' Stalkers: An Anti-Stalking Law for the Millennium , 27 Fordham Urb L.J. 945, 949-950 [2000] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference (see People v. Gordon , 23 N.Y.3d 643, 639, 992 N.Y.S.2d 700, 16 N.E.3d 1178 [2014] ), defendant's guilt of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • People v. Nemcow
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • 31 Enero 2022
    ...DECISION WILSON, J. JUDGE Disposition: Applications for Criminal Leave to appeal denied Decision Reported Below: App Term, 1st Dept: 73 Misc.3d 28 (NY) ...
1 cases
  • People v. Nemcow
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • 31 Enero 2022
    ...DECISION WILSON, J. JUDGE Disposition: Applications for Criminal Leave to appeal denied Decision Reported Below: App Term, 1st Dept: 73 Misc.3d 28 (NY) ...

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