From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Louis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 2, 2003
2 A.D.3d 109 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2366.

December 2, 2003.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), rendered July 6, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of conspiracy in the fourth degree, scheme to defraud in the first degree and grand larceny in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 1 to 3 years, 1 to 3 years, and 1 to 4 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Jane Tully, for Respondent.

Robert E. Carrigan, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Saxe, Ellerin, Marlow, Gonzalez, JJ.


The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. With respect to the grand larceny conviction "[t]he evidence warranted rejection of defendant's claim that he made, or believed he was making, authorized expenditures for union purposes, since the expenditures . . . were `so clearly personal in nature that such a claim is scarcely credible'" ( People v. Devine, 276 A.D.2d 258, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 933, quoting United States v. Ottley, 509 F.2d 667, 672), and there was no evidence that the union knew of, and actually approved, the particular expenses at issue. The evidence, including defendant's implicit misrepresentations that the expenses were for union business, supported the scheme to defraud conviction ( see People v. Keyes, 298 A.D.2d 234, 235, lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 583; People v. Napolitano, 282 A.D.2d 49, 56, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 866; see also People v. Wolf, 280 A.D.2d 102, 103, mod on other grounds 98 N.Y.2d 105). Given the parties' stipulation about the amount of money involved, and the reasonable inferences that could be drawn from defendant's conduct ( see People v. Barnes, 50 N.Y.2d 375, 381; People v. Parsons, 275 A.D.2d 933, 934, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 937, cert denied 532 U.S. 998), the evidence also supported defendant's conspiracy conviction. We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining arguments.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Louis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 2, 2003
2 A.D.3d 109 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Louis

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RICHARD LOUIS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 2, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 109 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
767 N.Y.S.2d 611