Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Sanders
Finally, we note that the certificate of conviction and the order of protection issued at sentencing contain clerical errors that must be corrected ( see generally People v Young , 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Sewell
We note that the certificate of conviction misspells defendant's name and contains an incorrect indictment number and must therefore be amended to include the proper spelling of defendant's name and the correct indictment number ( see People v Young , 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Gulbin
Finally, we note that the certificate of conviction incorrectly states that defendant was sentenced on October 30, 2015, and it must therefore be amended to reflect the correct sentencing date of October 30, 2014 (see generally People v Young, 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Kowal
The certificate of conviction therefore must be amended to remove any reference thereto ( see generally People v Young , 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [4th Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Wallace
Finally, we note that the certificate of conviction incorrectly recites that criminal possession of marihuana in the first degree is a class E felony, and it must therefore be amended to reflect that defendant was convicted of a class C felony (see Penal Law § 221.30; People v Young, 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Leonard
Finally, we agree with defendant and the People that the certificate of conviction, which recites that defendant was convicted of the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree occurring on or about June 5, 2005, must be amended to reflect the correct date on which the crime for which defendant was convicted occurred, namely, on or about October 6-7, 2007 (see People v Young, 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]; see also People v Brooks, 46 AD3d 1374, 1374 [2007]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Leonard
Finally, we agree with defendant and the People that the certificate of conviction, which recites that defendant was convicted of the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree occurring on or about June 5, 2005, must be amended to reflect the correct date on which the crime for which defendant was convicted occurred, namely, on or about October 6-7, 2007 (see People v Young, 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]; see also People v Brooks, 46 AD3d 1374, 1374 [2007]).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Vivenzio
The certificate of conviction therefore must be amended to reflect that fact (see People v Young, 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Vivenzio
The certificate of conviction therefore must be amended to reflect that fact (see People v Young, 74 AD3d 1864, 1865 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 811 [2010]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Janice M. Stojek
v.
Clear-All
v.
Clear-All
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jun 11, 2010.
Published
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Patrick H. NeMoyer, J.), entered July 1, 2009 in a personal injury action. The order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. Present—Martoche, J.P., Fahey, Carni, Sconiers and Green, JJ.