Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Sharif MUSLIM, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy L. Kahn, J.), rendered December 3, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of reckless endangerment in the first degree and resisting arrest, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 3 to 6 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the second felony offender adjudication and remanding for resentencing, and otherwise affirmed.
The court properly declined to submit the lesser included offense of second-degree reckless endangerment. There was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, that would support such a charge. Even giving due consideration to trial issues concerning police credibility, there was still no reasonable view other than that defendant led the police on a very dangerous high speed chase, and that his conduct established first-degree reckless endangerment (see People v. Parks, 281 A.D.2d 217, 722 N.Y.S.2d 15 [2001], lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 866, 730 N.Y.S.2d 40, 754 N.E.2d 1123 [2001] ).
Defendant was adjudicated a second felony offender on the basis of a prior conviction under New Jersey law for aggravated assault (N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:12-1[b][1] ). However, that offense can be committed through non-intentional conduct that is not the equivalent of reckless endangerment in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.25), since, unlike the New York statute, the New Jersey statute does not require creation of a grave risk of death. Matter of Villar, 212 A.D.2d 86, 628 N.Y.S.2d 607 [1995] is not to the contrary, because it only found the two statutes in question to be “essentially similar” under the standard applicable to automatic disbarment of a convicted attorney (see Matter of Cahn, 52 N.Y.2d 479, 482, 438 N.Y.S.2d 753, 420 N.E.2d 945 [1981]; Matter of Chu, 42 N.Y.2d 490, 492-493, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 369 N.E.2d 1 [1977] ).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 29, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)