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. William Dineen, appellant.
Submitted—June 21, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered July 29, 2009, convicting him of assault in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
After the jury announced its verdict, but before the jury was dismissed, defense counsel argued that the verdict was repugnant because the defendant was acquitted of the first and second counts of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10[1] ), but was convicted under the third and fourth counts of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[1] ). The defendant also was convicted under the fifth and sixth counts of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[2] ) and the seventh count of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 265.01[2] ).
A colloquy ensued in which defense counsel consented to the remedy proposed by the County Court, which was to dismiss the third and fourth counts charging assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[1] ), thereby obviating the need to resubmit the matter to the jury. Accordingly, the defendant waived his claim of repugnancy (see People v. Cervantes, 242 A.D.2d 730; People v. Abreu, 184 A.D.2d 707; People v. Gupta, 86 A.D.2d 960).
The defendant was afforded the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Taylor, 1 NY3d 174, 177; People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708; People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Thompson, 60 N.Y.2d 513, 519; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN and COHEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
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: 2009–07409 (Ind.No. 08–00610)
Decided: September 20, 2011
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)