From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Tarnowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 10, 1989
148 A.D.2d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

March 10, 1989

Appeal from the Oswego County Court, Hurlbutt, J.

Present — Denman, J.P., Green, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The evidence, particularly defendant's own statements and testimony, was sufficient to support his conviction for intentional murder, felony murder, attempted rape, and sexual abuse. Defendant's admissions established that he fondled the victim and attempted to rape her by forcible compulsion. Moreover, defendant's admissions established that he killed the victim "in the course of and in furtherance of [the attempted rape and sexual abuse] or of immediate flight therefrom" (Penal Law § 125.25). From the medical evidence and defendant's testimony establishing that defendant strangled the victim, the jury reasonably could have inferred that he intended to kill her.

We conclude that the court properly sentenced defendant to consecutive sentences on his convictions for intentional murder, sexual abuse and attempted rape. Since those crimes were discrete, successive, and not based upon the same "act or omission" (Penal Law § 70.25), there is no bar to consecutive sentences.


Summaries of

People v. Tarnowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 10, 1989
148 A.D.2d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Tarnowski

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROY TARNOWSKI…

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

Date published: Mar 10, 1989

Citations

148 A.D.2d 1001 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
539 N.Y.S.2d 232

Citing Cases

People v. Pitsley

The indictment alleged and defendant was convicted of two burglaries on different premises. Because those…

People v. Jeffrey Miller

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621),…