Van Leer-Greenberg on Behalf of Morris v. Massaro

CourtNew York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtKAYE
CitationVan Leer-Greenberg on Behalf of Morris v. Massaro, 642 N.Y.S.2d 618, 87 N.Y.2d 996, 665 N.E.2d 188 (N.Y. 1996)
Decision Date21 March 1996
Docket NumberLEER-GREENBERG
Parties, 665 N.E.2d 188 In the Matter of Valerie VAN, on Behalf of George MORRIS, Respondent, v. Dominic R. MASSARO, as Justice of the Supreme Court, Bronx County, et al., Appellants.
OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the petition dismissed.

The CPLR article 78 prohibition proceeding sought (1) to bar respondent Trial Justice from sua sponte vacating defendant Morris's guilty plea, and (2) to compel the Trial Justice to impose the promised sentence on a misdemeanor conviction based on the plea.

Defendant was indicted in December 1993 on a class D felony count of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02[4], and a class A misdemeanor count of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 265.01[1]. He moved to dismiss the indictment for legal insufficiency of the Grand Jury evidence. Although no formal decision was rendered on the motion, the Trial Justice, on two different pretrial court appearances, announced from the Bench that the felony charge was dismissed.

Based on this premise, the trial court accepted a plea of guilty from defendant on August 1, 1994 to the misdemeanor charge and agreed to impose a sentence of three years' probation. Sometime thereafter, the Trial Justice filed a written decision, dated July 29, 1994, denying the motion to dismiss and, thus, sustaining the felony count of the indictment. On October 21, 1994, the sentencing date, he also orally advised the parties that the felony count was reinstated and offered defendant the opportunity to withdraw the guilty plea to the misdemeanor count. Defendant refused. On December 6, 1994, defense counsel initiated the instant collateral prohibition proceeding as petitioner on behalf of her client in the criminal proceeding.

The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, granted the petition and remanded the case "for sentence in accordance with the agreement entered upon the record." As the two-Justice dissent was on a question of law, we need not answer the question certified by the Appellate Division's grant of leave...

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
12 cases
  • Morris v. Reynolds
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 3 Agosto 2000
    ...has the inherent authority to correct its own error before imposition of sentence. See Van Leer-Greenberg ex rel. Morris v. Massaro, 87 N.Y.2d 996, 642 N.Y.S.2d 618, 665 N.E.2d 188, 189 (1996). On June 4, 1997, Morris entered a guilty plea to the felony count and was sentenced to between tw......
  • People v. Francis
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 21 Octubre 2015
    ...extent of that power depends on whether the case is still pending. As the Court of Appeals said in Matter of Van Leer–Greenberg v. Massar o, 87 N.Y.2d 996, 642 N.Y.S.2d 618, 665 N.E.2d 188, “[b]efore sentence is imposed, trial courts in criminal cases have the general inherent authority to ......
  • Hussain v. Lynch
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 20 Abril 2023
    ... ... their own mistakes" ( Matter of Van Leer-Greenberg v ... Massaro , 87 N.Y.2d 996, 998 [1996] [citations omitted]) ... The ... ...
  • Morris v. Reynolds, 98Civ.5439(HB)(AJP).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 4 Mayo 1999
    ...class A misdemeanor count of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. See In re Van Leer-Greenberg ex rel. Morris v. Massaro, 87 N.Y.2d 996, 997, 642 N.Y.S.2d 618, 618, 665 N.E.2d 188 (1996). The trial judge initially dismissed the felony count for legal insufficiency, and on A......
  • Get Started for Free