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. Dean Pacquette, appellant.
Argued-April 19, 2010
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered November 12, 2008, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Ingram, J.), of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.
ORDERED that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the sentence imposed; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, any error in not suppressing his statements to law enforcement officers was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt since the evidence of the defendant's guilt, without reference to the alleged error, was overwhelming, and there is no reasonable possibility that the alleged error might have contributed to the defendant's conviction (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237).
However, the remarks of the sentencing court demonstrated that it improperly considered the crime of which the defendant was acquitted as a basis for sentencing (see People v. Romero, 71 AD3d 795; People v. Schrader, 23 AD3d 585, 585-586; People v. Errington, 307 A.D.2d 325; People v. Smith, 305 A.D.2d 432; People v. Ramsay, 288 A.D.2d 240; see also People v. Maula, 163 A.D.2d 180). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing.
In light of the foregoing, the defendant's remaining contention is academic.
SKELOS, J.P., SANTUCCI, LEVENTHAL and HALL, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2008-10775 (Ind.No. 4787 /07)
Decided: May 18, 2010
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)