From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 18, 1985
111 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

June 18, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Brenda Soloff, J.).


On or about March 17, 1981, a bombing occurred at 9 Bleeker Street, New York County. During the course of their investigation of that crime, the New York City Police Department placed the defendant under surveillance. While monitoring his movements, the police learned that the defendant was a fugitive from justice, since, on or about March 27, 1972, he had failed to appear to answer Federal criminal charges pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Subsequently, on the evening of September 16, 1981, city police officers, together with agents of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration, arrested defendant inside his apartment, located at 47A Horatio Street, New York County. Later that evening, these law enforcement officers searched defendant's car and found in the trunk of that vehicle, among other contraband, nine operable guns of various types, such as: a .9 mm Uzi semiautomatic carbine, a .9 mm Beretta semiautomatic pistol, three .38 Colt revolvers, a .9 mm Smith and Wesson semiautomatic pistol, a .357 Magnum Colt revolver, a .9 mm Walther semiautomatic pistol, and a .380 AMT semiautomatic pistol.

Thereafter, the defendant was indicted. As a result of a trial, a jury found defendant guilty of nine counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. Following his conviction on these charges, the trial court sentenced defendant to the combination of concurrent and consecutive sentences set forth supra.

We find that the trial court erred in its imposition of consecutive sentences. A unanimous Court of Appeals held in People v. Christman ( 23 N.Y.2d 429, 433-434) that "[a]lthough [the crimes upon which defendant was found guilty] were * * * capable of separate prosecution and conviction, they were so unified with the basic acts made criminal by the Penal Law that, on the present record, they could not be the basis for separate punishments (former Penal Law, § 1938, now § 70.25, subd. 2; People ex rel. Maurer v. Jackson, 2 N.Y.2d 259; People v. Repola, 305 N.Y. 740). Hence * * * separate consecutive sentences [for these crimes] may not be imposed."

Our examination of the other contentions of error raised by the defendant leads us to find that they are without merit.

Concur — Ross, J.P., Asch, Bloom, Milonas and Ellerin, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 18, 1985
111 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Rogers

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RALPH ROGERS, Also…

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

Date published: Jun 18, 1985

Citations

111 A.D.2d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

Here, the defendant's convictions of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree under counts 7, 8,…

The People v. Mitchell

We therefore modify the judgment accordingly. The evidence at trial established only that defendant…