People v. Hall, 198 A.D.2d 716 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). · Go Syfert
People v. Hall, 198 A.D.2d 716 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
10 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Sanchez (ny, 2002-07-09)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sanchez (2×)
NY · 2002 · confidence medium
The lower courts have similarly understood (and have uniformly applied) Register’s holding that the two crimes share precisely the same mens rea of ordinary recklessness (see People v Shabaz, 173 AD2d 498, 499 [1991] [holding that depraved indifference murder has a mens rea of recklessness, “the same mental state required for manslaughter, second degree”]; People v Kalwasinski, 160 AD2d 732, 732 [1990] [holding that “(t)he only culpable mental state required for depraved indifference murder, * * * like reckless manslaughter, * * * is ‘recklessness’ ”]; People v Zebrowski, 198 AD2…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Mark A. Hall
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 24, 1993.
198 A.D.2d 716
1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11018
Mikoll.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Mikoll, J. P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Rensselaer County (Dwyer, Jr., J.), rendered May 2, 1990, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to burglary in the third degree and was sentenced as a second felony offender tc an indeterminate period of incarceration of 1 Vi to 3 years. The sentence is to be served consecutively to the prison sentence imposed on April 11, 1990 following defendant’s guilty plea to criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree.

Defendant contests the imposition of consecutive sentences, contending that the sentences were incorrectly imposed pursuant to Penal Law § 70.25. Defendant’s pleas were based on a burglary committed at 1:00 p.m. on November 2, 1989 when defendant entered a home on Irish Hill Road in the Town of Schodack, Rensselaer County, and removed the contents therefrom. At 2:45 p.m. on the same day, defendant was arrested while traveling in his truck on U.S. Route 20 in the Town of Guilderland, Albany County, with the stolen contents of the home in his truck. Defendant urges that the sentences for the two offenses should run concurrently because the burglary offense was a material element of the possessory offense. It is urged that defendant, notwithstanding his consent to the plea, cannot waive his rights under Penal Law § 70.25 to enlarge County Court’s sentencing power.

There should be an affirmance. Where separate and distinct acts are committed in violation of different sections of the Penal Law, consecutive sentences are appropriate. Here, the statutory elements of the possessory offense are categorically discrete from the burglary offense (see, People v Day, 73 NY2d 208).

Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Cardona, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.