From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Stubbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 12, 2001
281 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted February 16, 2001.

March 12, 2001.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered February 11, 1999, convicting him of criminal mischief in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ethel P. Ross, Rye, N.Y., for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, HOWARD MILLER, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

As the defendant did not request a hearing to fix the amount of restitution and the record contained sufficient evidence to support a finding as to the out-of-pocket loss he caused, the County Court properly fixed the amount of restitution without holding a hearing (see, People v. Kim, 91 N.Y.2d 407). The amount of restitution was not excessive because "the ordinary meaning of `restitution' is restoring someone to a position he occupied before a particular event" (Hughey v. United States, 495 U.S. 411, 416; see also, People v. Purcell, 161 A.D.2d 812).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Stubbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 12, 2001
281 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Stubbs

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. AARON STUBBS, APPELLANT

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

Date published: Mar 12, 2001

Citations

281 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
721 N.Y.S.2d 562

Citing Cases

People v. Ward

Penal Law § 60.27(2), which provides for restitution, is clear as to when a hearing must be held in setting…

People v. Ramsundar

The testimony of the People's witness who summarized certain voluminous records was properly admitted (see…