THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. HOWARD HARRIS DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2010)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. HOWARD HARRIS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

KA 04-02941

Decided: December 30, 2010

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, GREEN, PINE, AND GORSKI, JJ.

KRISTIN F. SPLAIN, CONFLICT DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (ANNEMARIE DILS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. MICHAEL C. GREEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (JOSEPH D. WALDORF OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of three counts of rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35[3] ), defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment pursuant to CPL 30.10 because the People failed to charge him before the statute of limitations had expired. We reject that contention. The record supports the court's determination that the crimes charged in the indictment were not reported by the victim until 2003, and thus the limitations period did not commence until then (see CPL 30.10[3][f] ). Contrary to the further contentions of defendant, he received meaningful representation (see generally People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network