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.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Aaron LUSBY, Defendant-Appellant.
We reject the contention of defendant that the evidence that he signed a blank fingerprint card with a false name is legally insufficient to support his conviction of forgery in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.10 [2]; see People v. Van Schoick, 198 A.D.2d 907, 604 N.Y.S.2d 455, lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 811, 611 N.Y.S.2d 147, 633 N.E.2d 502; see also People v. Kirk, 115 A.D.2d 758, 497 N.Y.S.2d 139, affd. 68 N.Y.2d 722, 506 N.Y.S.2d 333, 497 N.E.2d 700). We reject the further contention of defendant that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's belated request for funds to hire a forensic toxicologist (see People v. Drumgoole, 234 A.D.2d 888, 889-890, 652 N.Y.S.2d 443, lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 1011, 658 N.Y.S.2d 249, 680 N.E.2d 623; People v. Schneider, 188 A.D.2d 754, 756-757, 591 N.Y.S.2d 550, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 892, 597 N.Y.S.2d 954, 613 N.E.2d 986). Defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel (see generally People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400). We reject the contention of defendant that the court penalized him for exercising his right to trial by imposing a more severe sentence than that offered pursuant to a plea bargain (see People v. Samuels, 269 A.D.2d 859, 703 N.Y.S.2d 768, lv. denied 94 N.Y.2d 925, 708 N.Y.S.2d 364, 729 N.E.2d 1163; People v. Jones, 229 A.D.2d 980, 645 N.Y.S.2d 692, lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 925, 654 N.Y.S.2d 727, 677 N.E.2d 299). As a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, however, we modify the judgment by vacating the finding that defendant is a persistent felony offender and reducing the sentence imposed on the forgery count to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 3 1/212 to 7 years (see People v. Rivera, 166 A.D.2d 367, 368-369, 561 N.Y.S.2d 172, lv. denied 77 N.Y.2d 842, 567 N.Y.S.2d 211, 568 N.E.2d 660; see also People v. Clarke, 222 A.D.2d 1035, 636 N.Y.S.2d 529, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 934, 647 N.Y.S.2d 168, 670 N.E.2d 452).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice by vacating the finding that defendant is a persistent felony offender and reducing the sentence imposed on forgery in the second degree to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 3 1/212 to 7 years and as modified the judgment is affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
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.
Decided: December 31, 2003
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)