Opinion
2019-1332 K CR
01-21-2022
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Martin England, Appellant.
Appellate Advocates (Kendra Hutchinson of counsel), for appellant. Kings County District Attorney (Leonard Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel of counsel), for respondent.
Unpublished Opinion
Appellate Advocates (Kendra Hutchinson of counsel), for appellant.
Kings County District Attorney (Leonard Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel of counsel), for respondent.
PRESENT:: THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, P.J., WAVNY TOUSSAINT, DONNA-MARIE E. GOLIA, JJ
Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Consuelo Mallafre Melendez, J.), rendered October 24, 2018. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and imposed sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and the accusatory instrument is dismissed.
Defendant was charged in an accusatory instrument with, among other things, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 265.01 [1]). It was specifically alleged that defendant had possessed a gravity knife. On October 24, 2018, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree in full satisfaction of the accusatory instrument, and sentence was imposed.
On appeal, defendant contends that the judgment should be reversed based on the amendment of Penal Law § 265.01 (1), which should be applied retroactively, as it decriminalized possession of a gravity knife. In the alternative, defendant asks that the judgment be reversed and the accusatory instrument dismissed in the interest of justice. The People concede that the judgment of conviction should be reversed and the accusatory instrument dismissed in the interest of justice.
On May 30, 2019, Penal Law § 265.01 was amended by removing gravity knives from subsection one thereof (see L 2019, ch 34, § 1 [eff May 30, 2019]). Under the circumstances presented, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c]), we reverse the judgment of conviction and dismiss the accusatory instrument (see e.g. People v Johnson, 192 A.D.3d 603 [2021]; People v Merrill, 187 A.D.3d 1058 [2020]; People v Caviness, 176 A.D.3d 522 [2019]; People v Banos, 68 Misc.3d 1 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2020]).
ALIOTTA, P.J., TOUSSAINT and GOLIA, JJ., concur.