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, etc., respondent, v. Patrick CASE, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Collini, J.), rendered February 9, 2004, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, rape in the second degree (18 counts), incest (14 counts), reckless endangerment in the first degree (11 counts), and endangering the welfare of a child, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions regarding the convictions of rape in the second degree and incest during specified two-month periods are not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Weldon, 191 A.D.2d 662, 595 N.Y.S.2d 109; People v. Barrett, 166 A.D.2d 657, 658, 561 N.Y.S.2d 465; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 541 N.Y.S.2d 9). In any event, the contentions are without merit. The defendant repeatedly raped and sexually abused his biological daughter over a period of five years. The victim could not recall the exact dates of the incidents. The indictment charged the defendant with a specific crime during a specified two-month period. In view of the age of the victim, the repetitive and clandestine nature of the crimes, the continuous and long-term nature of the abuse, and the fact that time is not a material element of the charged crimes, the two-month intervals were reasonably specific and provided the defendant with adequate notice (see People v. Watt, 81 N.Y.2d 772, 774, 593 N.Y.S.2d 782, 609 N.E.2d 135; People v. Keindl, 68 N.Y.2d 410, 419, 509 N.Y.S.2d 790, 502 N.E.2d 577; People v. Morris, 61 N.Y.2d 290, 293-296, 473 N.Y.S.2d 769, 461 N.E.2d 1256; People v. Cosby, 222 A.D.2d 690, 636 N.Y.S.2d 73; People v. Barrett, supra at 658, 561 N.Y.S.2d 465; People v. Willette, 109 A.D.2d 112, 114-115, 490 N.Y.S.2d 290; People v. Coveney, 134 Misc.2d 894, 513 N.Y.S.2d 324). Moreover, the counts are neither duplicitous nor multiplicitous (see People v. Keindl, supra at 419, 509 N.Y.S.2d 790, 502 N.E.2d 577; People v. Cosby, supra ).
The defendant received the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Henry, 95 N.Y.2d 563, 721 N.Y.S.2d 577, 744 N.E.2d 112; People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584).
Thank you for your feedback!
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: May 09, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)