Legal Opinion

People v. Mainella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 10, 1998Published

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that County Court violated Penal Law § 70.25 (2) and (3) by imposing consecutive sentences upon his conviction of two counts of petit larceny (Penal Law § 155.25). Defendant, however, was *1001not charged with larcenies committed by a single act or omission, or during a single incident or transaction. Each offense was a separate crime committed at a discrete time by a distinct act (see, People v Day, 73 NY2d 208; People v Pinkard, 209 AD2d 1051; People v Levine, 188 AD2d 665, lv denied 82 NY2d 708). The sentence is neither unduly harsh…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. DayNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. People v. LevineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  3. People v. PinkardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API