From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 7, 1981
81 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

Opinion

May 7, 1981


Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered December 12, 1975, convicting defendant of assault in the second degree and sentencing him as a predicate felon to an indeterminate term of two to four years, unanimously modified, on the law, to vacate defendant's adjudication as a predicate felony offender, strike the provision for a minimum term from the sentence and, except as thus modified, affirmed. As the People concede, with commendable candor, defendant should not have been adjudicated a predicate felony offender because his previous Federal conviction was for a crime which would not have constituted a felony in New York. To be designated as a predicate felony, an out-of-State conviction must have been for an offense "for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one year * * * was authorized and is authorized in this state irrespective of whether such sentence was imposed" (Penal Law, § 70.06, subd 1, par [b], cl [i]). The Federal statute under which defendant was convicted ( U.S. Code, tit 18, § 659) provides that a term of imprisonment in excess of one year may be imposed for a larceny involving property of the value of $100 or more, while in New York a prison term of more than one year may be imposed only if the value of the stolen property exceeds $250 (Penal Law, § 155.30, subd 1). In determining whether an out-of-State conviction is cognizable as a felony in New York, "It is the statute upon which the indictment was drawn that necessarily defines and measures the crime * * * there is a difference between the crime of which [a defendant] was convicted and the `act' which he may have committed * * * a `crime' is to be measured and limited by the statute which defines it" (People v Olah, 300 N.Y. 96, 98, 99). That defendant pleaded guilty to a theft of property valued in the excess of $5,500 is irrelevant since under Olah (supra), the elements of the offense as defined in the statute, rather than the specific facts of a particular case, are determinative. Thus, defendant's Federal conviction was not for a crime which would be punishable as a felony in New York and we modify the sentence, which has been served, accordingly. (See People v Brooks, 73 A.D.2d 564.) In view of our determination we need not consider defendant's other challenge to the efficacy of the Federal conviction as a predicate felony.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ross, Carro, Silverman and Bloom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 7, 1981
81 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)
Case details for

People v. Martin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DOUGLAS MARTIN…

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

Date published: May 7, 1981

Citations

81 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

As conceded by respondent, it was possible to violate the Federal statute under circumstances which, under…

People v. Simon

This court distinguishes its ruling from the principle set forth in the landmark case of People v Olah ( 300…