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. Dominic FRANZA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered April 8, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of three counts of attempted murder in the second degree and one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the first degree, and sentencing him to consecutive terms of 8 1/3 to 25 years, 8 1/3 to 25 years, 8 1/3 to 25 years and 3 to 9 years, respectively, and an order of the same court and Justice, entered on or about October 19, 1993, denying, without a hearing, defendant's CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment of conviction, unanimously affirmed.
The circumstantial evidence of guilt, including several highly incriminating items of handwriting evidence, was legally sufficient, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Gates, 24 N.Y.2d 666, 668-669, 301 N.Y.S.2d 597, 249 N.E.2d 450). Defendant's contention that there was no probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant for his apartment is without merit, since, under the circumstances, it was reasonable to conclude that the items used to make the pipebomb would be found in his residence (see, People v. Mendez, 199 A.D.2d 182, 605 N.Y.S.2d 94, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 874, 613 N.Y.S.2d 134, 635 N.E.2d 303). The court's charge on circumstantial evidence conveyed the appropriate standards (People v. Sanchez, 61 N.Y.2d 1022, 475 N.Y.S.2d 376, 463 N.E.2d 1228). We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing. We have considered defendant's remaining contentions, including those addressed to the denial of his motion to vacate judgment, and find them to be without merit.
Pro Se motion to file CPL 440.10 exhibits denied.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 13, 1997
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)