Opinion
570666/14
02-14-2020
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Joseph J. Dawson, J.), rendered December 18, 2013, affirmed.
Contrary to defendant's sole contention on appeal, the crime of which he was convicted, attempted patronizing a prostitute in the third degree (see Penal Law §§ 110; 230.04), is a legally cognizable offense (see People v. Menner , 53 Misc 3d 52 [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1029 [2016] ; see also People v. Ward , 123 AD3d 590 [2014], lv denied 25 NY3d 954 [2015] ; People v. Rodriguez , 56 AD3d 574 [2008). Inasmuch as the crime of patronizing a prostitute in the third degree (see Penal Law § 230.04 ) is not result-based, but instead imposes criminal liability for engaging in specified conduct, attempted patronizing a prostitute in the third degree is legally cognizable, "since one can attempt to engage in conduct" ( People v. Aponte , 16 NY3d 106, 109 [2011], quoting People v. Prescott , 95 NY2d 655, 659 [2001] ).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.