People v. Foy

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Goldbaum

    2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 51624 (N.Y. App. Term 2003)

    15; People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). We have reviewed defendant's remaining claims of error and find them without merit ( People v. Maxam, 161 AD2d 961; People v. Bishop, 111 AD2d 398; People v. Foy, 155 Misc 2d 81, 83-84 [Crim Ct, Bronx County], affd, 166 Misc 2d 358, affd 88 NY2d 742).

  2. State v. Hemmer

    3 Neb. App. 769 (Neb. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 6 times
    Holding that no crime of attempted reckless assault of police officer exists because reckless is not intentional mens rea

    Model Penal Code ยง 5.01, comment at 303-04 (1985). A majority of other jurisdictions addressing this issue has also held that one cannot commit the crime of attempt where the underlying crime contains only a reckless mens rea. See, e.g., People v. Foy, 155 Misc.2d 81, 587 N.Y.S.2d 111 (1992); Minshew v. State, 594 So.2d 703 (Ala. Crim. App. 1991); State v. Dunbar, 117 Wn.2d 587, 817 P.2d 1360 (1991) (en banc); Wells v. State, 555 N.E.2d 1366 ( Ind. App. 1990); People v. Coleman, 131 Ill. App.3d 76, 475 N.E.2d 565 (1985); State v. Zupetz, 322 N.W.2d 730 (Minn. 1982); State v. Smith, 21 Or. App. 270, 534 P.2d 1180 (1975); State v. Melvin, 49 Wis.2d 246, 181 N.W.2d 490 (1970).

  3. People v. Potter

    172 Misc. 2d 409 (N.Y. Crim. Ct. 1997)   Cited 2 times

    On the contrary, prosecutors commonly reduce charges for a variety of reasons, including for legitimate trial strategy and for lack of resources. ( See, People v Zimmer, 51 N.Y.2d 390, 394; People v Foy, 155 Misc.2d 81, 82-83 [Crim Ct, Bronx County 1992]; People v Ortiz, 99 Misc.2d 1069, 1075-1076 [Crim Ct, Bronx County 1979].) In the current case, the prosecution, in their motion papers seeking reduction, asserts legitimate strategy reasons for their motion to reduce: the complainant's injuries might not rise to the threshold needed for the A misdemeanor charge of assault in the third degree and the confinement of the complainant might not be of sufficient duration to constitute the A misdemeanor charge of unlawful imprisonment.

  4. People v. Estevez

    163 Misc. 2d 839 (N.Y. Crim. Ct. 1995)   Cited 1 times

    The court reasoned that the Legislature, in mandating nonjury trials, limited the Judge's sentencing discretion sub silentio in that in order for CPL 30.40 to be constitutionally read, it must require that where multiple petty offenses are tried together the maximum aggregate imprisonment must be limited to six months (supra, at 1027). Then in People v Foy ( 155 Misc.2d 81, 85 [Crim Ct, Bronx County 1992]) the court ruled that there is no requirement for jury trial when offenses carrying punishments of six months' imprisonment or less are consolidated for trial where each involves entirely separate incidents. LIMITED SENTENCE UPON CONSOLIDATION