Justia New York Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

This consolidated appeal involved cases involving three defendants, each of whom was convicted of "simple" knowing, unlawful possession of a loaded weapon in addition to one or more other criminal counts. In each case, the trial courts imposed sentences for the weapon possession counts to run consecutively to the sentences for other crimes committed with the same weapon. Defendants appealed. The Appellate Division affirmed in each instance. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that because the three defendants completed the crime of possession independently of their commission of the later crimes, consecutive sentencing was permissible. View "People v. Brown" on Justia Law

At issue in these two consolidated appeals was whether, for purposes of determining the sequentiality of a defendant's current and prior convictions under the State's sentence enhancement statutes, the controlling date of sentence for the defendant's prior conviction is the original date of sentence for that conviction or the date of a later resentencing rectifying the flawed imposition of postrelease supervision (PRS). The Court of Appeals held (1) under the circumstances presented in these cases, the date of sentence for a defendant's prior conviction is the original date on which the defendant received a lawful prison term upon a valid conviction for that prior crime, regardless of whether the defendant or government sought resentencing on that conviction to correct an improper imposition of PRS; and (2) therefore, at sentencing for a more recent crime, the defendant's prior conviction qualifies as a predicate felony conviction if the original date of sentence precedes the commission of the present offense. View "People v. Boyer" on Justia Law

Plaintiffs here were related entities that leased a building to The Salvation Army. The Salvation Army operated the building as a homeless shelter under an agreement with the City of New York. After the City terminated its agreement with The Salvation Army, The Salvation Army terminated the lease. Plaintiffs brought this action to collect damages from The Salvation Army, claiming that the leased premises were returned in bad condition in violation of the lease. The appellate division concluded that Plaintiffs had adequately pleaded a breach of the lease. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Plaintiffs' claim was barred by the plain language of the lease. View "JFK Holding Co. LLC v. City of New York" on Justia Law