Opinion
90
January 30, 2003.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dora Irizarry, J.), rendered February 27, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree and criminal impersonation in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 3½ to 7 years and 1 year, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the conviction of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree and remanding the matter for a new trial, and otherwise affirmed.
Matthew J. Galluzzo, for Respondent.
Leonard J. Levenson, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ.
The court should have submitted the issue of venue to the jury, as duly requested by defendant (People v. Greenberg, 89 N.Y.2d 553, 556; People v. Ribowsky, 77 N.Y.2d 284, 291-292). Although this issue is irrelevant with regard to the conviction of criminal impersonation in the second degree because that crime as charged was a continuing offense which began in Kings County and continued into New York County, it constituted reversible error as to the conviction of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree. With respect to that conviction, and unlike the criminal impersonation conviction, it does not appear from the instructions or by necessary implication from the verdict that the jury made a finding of proper venue (see People v. Ribowsky, 77 N.Y.2d at 292-294). The People's remaining arguments in favor of affirmance of the forged instrument conviction are unpreserved and unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.