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. Ronnie LACY, Defendant–Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert M. Mandelbaum, J.), rendered May 10, 2021, as amended May 10, 2021, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of persistent sexual abuse, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of four years, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the indictment dismissed.
The indictment was jurisdictionally defective because it failed to charge defendant with committing a particular crime (see People v. Hardware, 200 A.D.3d 431, 154 N.Y.S.3d 767 [1st Dept. 2021], lv denied 38 N.Y.3d 927, 164 N.Y.S.3d 27, 184 N.E.3d 848 [2022]). The indictment purported to charge defendant with persistent sexual abuse, a statute that elevates the repeated commission of any of three separately codified misdemeanors to a felony (see id.), but it failed to “specify which of the three discrete qualifying offenses defendant was alleged to have committed” (id. at 431, 154 N.Y.S.3d 767). Hardware is dispositive of this appeal, and the People's arguments to the contrary are unavailing. In Hardware the indictment alleged that defendant had “subjected an individual to ․ sexual contact.” We held that this allegation was inadequate because ‘sexual contact’ is an element of all three of the qualifying offenses. Therefore, the indictment did not give defendant notice “with sufficient precision to clearly apprise the defendant ․ of the conduct which is the subject of the accusation” (CPL 200.50[7][a]; see also People v. Sanchez, 84 N.Y.2d 440, 445, 618 N.Y.S.2d 887, 643 N.E.2d 509 [1994]). The only additional allegation in the indictment in this case is that defendant acted “without the [victim's] consent.” That allegation similarly failed to specify the underlying crime, because the absence of consent is also an element shared by all three of the qualifying offenses.
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.
Docket No: 163
Decided: May 04, 2023
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)