From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mercer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 9, 1986
121 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

June 9, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.).


Judgment modified, on the law, by vacating the sentence imposed. As so modified, judgment affirmed, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for resentencing.

Contrary to the defendant's assertion, the record is barren of any evidence tending to show that the defendant's inculpatory statements were obtained "by means of any promise or statement of fact, which promise or statement create[d] a substantial risk that the defendant might falsely incriminate himself" (CPL 60.45 [b] [i]), thereby rendering them involuntary. The contention that the defendant was misled by statements that he would not be charged with a crime due to a defense of justification was refuted by the defendant himself on direct examination when he was asked the following question and gave the following answer:

"Q And did anybody else tell you that if you explained this that it was in self-defense that you wouldn't be charged with a crime?

"A [The police officer] told me — he didn't tell me I wouldn't be charged with a crime. He told me it would be decided on what I would be charged with".

Further, there is no proof that the defendant was deceived so as to induce a false confession (see, People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1).

However, as the defense counsel asserts and the People concede, the defendant's sentence of imprisonment for a term of 8 to 16 years upon his conviction of manslaughter in the first degree, a class B violent felony offense, was illegal.

"The minimum period of imprisonment that may be imposed for a violent felony offense (if a defendant is not a predicate felony offender) cannot exceed one third of the maximum, unless the sentence is for a conviction of a class B armed felony offense (Penal Law § 70.02). Manslaughter in the first degree is not an armed felony offense since neither the possession nor display of a gun is an element of the crime". (People v. Frascella, 116 A.D.2d 587; see also, People v. Hooper, 112 A.D.2d 317; People v Gonzalez, 99 A.D.2d 1001). Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Mercer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 9, 1986
121 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Mercer

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LEMUEL MERCER…

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

Date published: Jun 9, 1986

Citations

121 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Dhillon

; see People v. Cruickshank, 105 A.D.2d 325, 334, 484 N.Y.S.2d 328 ). Here, as the People correctly concede,…

People v. Dhillon

Although a youth convicted of an armed felony is eligible for youthful offender status only where the court…