People v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 15 March 2011
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,v.Daivery TAYLOR, et al., appellants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

82 A.D.3d 1016

919 N.Y.S.2d 62

2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 02042

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,

v.Daivery TAYLOR, et al., appellants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

March 15, 2011.

Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Richard E. Mischel and Lisa R. Marlow Wolland of counsel), for appellant Law Offices of Silverman & Taylor.Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Barbara D. Underwood, Roseann B. MacKechnie, and Monica Wagner of counsel), for respondent.WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ARIEL E. BELEN, and SHERI S. ROMAN, JJ.

Appeal by the defendant Daivery Taylor and separate appeal by the defendant Law Offices of Silverman & Taylor from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), rendered July 31, 2006, convicting them each of scheme to defraud in the first degree and offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (four counts), after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentences. By decision and order of this Court dated October 7, 2008, the judgment was reversed ( see People v. Taylor, 55 A.D.3d 640, 865 N.Y.S.2d 266). By order of the Court of Appeals dated February 26, 2009, the People were granted leave to appeal from the decision and order of this Court. The People, as limited by their brief, appealed, by permission, from so much of the decision and order of this Court as reversed so much of the judgment as convicted the defendant Law Offices of Silverman & Taylor of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (four counts). By order of the Court of Appeals dated February 6, 2010, the decision and order of this Court was reversed insofar as appealed from, so much of the judgment as convicted the defendant Law Offices of Silverman & Taylor of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (four counts) was reinstated, and the matter was remitted to this Court for further proceedings ( see People v. Taylor, 14 N.Y.3d 727, 900 N.Y.S.2d 237, 926 N.E.2d 591). Justices Mastro and Roman have been substituted for Justice Carni and former Justice Lifson ( see 22 NYCRR 670.1[c] ).

ORDERED that, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals, so much of the judgment as convicted the defendant Law Offices of Silverman & Taylor of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (four counts) is affirmed.

The defendant Law Offices of Silverman & Taylor (hereinafter the defendant) was convicted of four counts of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, based upon its filing of retainer statements with the New York State Office of Court Administration that contained false or misleading information. The element of “intent to defraud,” as articulated in the definition of the crime of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (Penal Law § 175.35) “refers only to a defendant's state of mind in acting with a conscious aim and objective to defraud” ( People v. Taylor, 14 N.Y.3d 727, 729, 900 N.Y.S.2d 237, 926 N.E.2d 591). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to...