Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

PEOPLE v. COLON

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Nov 27, 2007
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Defendant did not preserve his claim that his conviction was the product of governmental misconduct ( see People v Montgomery, 88 NY2d 1041), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find it without merit ( see People v Isaacson, 44 NY2d 511).

Since defendant's convictions of second and third-degree weapon possession were based on the same possessions of identical weapons, we vacate the third-degree convictions in the interest of justice ( see People v Montgomery, 293 AD2d 369 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 712).

As the People concede, defendant was improperly adjudicated a persistent violent felony offender because the adjudication was based on predicate convictions that did not meet the sequentiality requirement of Penal Law ยง 70.08 ( see People v Morse, 62 NY2d 205). However, the People are not precluded from attempting to establish, on the basis of a different conviction or convictions, that defendant is nonetheless a persistent violent felony offender ( see People v Sailor, 65 NY2d 224, cert denied 474 US 982).