Return to New Filings Page


For February 13, 2015 through February 19, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

AFILAL (ABDELOUHAD), PEOPLE v (43 Misc 3d 142(A)):
1st Dept. App. Term order of 6/4/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Read, J., 2/6/15; CRIMES - PLEA OF GUILTY - SUFFICIENCY OF ALLOCUTION - WAIVER OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS - WHETHER THE RECORD ESTABLISHED THAT DEFENDANT KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY AND INTELLIGENTLY WAIVED HIS BOYKIN RIGHTS WHERE DEFENDANT STATED, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT HE UNDERSTOOD HE WAS WAIVING HIS RIGHT TO A TRIAL AND HAD A CHANCE TO FULLY DISCUSS THE PLEA AND ITS CONSEQUENCES WITH COUNSEL; CRIMINAL POSSESSION OF MARIHUANA IN THE FIFTH DEGREE - SUFFICIENCY OF FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS IN ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT; Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County, convicted defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree, and imposed sentence; App. Term affirmed.

HOGAN (MARCUS D.), PEOPLE v (118 AD3d 1263):
4th Dept. App. Div. order of 6/13/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Lippman, Ch.J., 2/3/15; CRIMES - CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES - PRESUMPTION OF KNOWING POSSESSION - WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTED THE TRIAL COURT'S APPLICATION OF THE "DRUG FACTORY PRESUMPTION" SET FORTH IN PENAL LAW § 220.25(2); RIGHT TO COUNSEL - EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION - WHETHER DEFENDANT RECEIVED EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHERE HIS ATTORNEY FAILED TO DISCUSS HIS RIGHT TO TESTIFY BEFORE THE GRAND JURY AND FAILED TO MAKE A TIMELY MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT BASED ON THE PEOPLE'S ALLEGED VIOLATION OF CPL 190.50(5)(a); Supreme Court, Monroe County, convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and imposed sentence; App. Div. affirmed.

MITCHELL, MATTER OF v FISCHER (120 AD3d 1475):
3rd Dept. App. Div. judgment of 9/11/14 and orders of 10/23/14 and 12/22/14; sua sponte examination whether (1) the appeal is timely taken from the 10/23/14 order and the 9/11/14 judgment; (2) the 12/22/14 and 10/23/14 orders finally determine the proceeding; (3) the proceeding is moot as to the 9/11/14 judgment; and (4) whether a substantial constitutional question is directly involved in the App. Div. judgment and orders appealed from; PRISONS AND PRISONERS - CHALLENGE TO APPELLATE DIVISION JUDGMENT DISMISSING, WITHOUT COSTS, CPLR ARTICLE 78 PETITION AS MOOT, APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS, AND APPELLATE DIVISION ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - WHETHER PETITIONER WAS ENTITLED TO COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS WHERE RESPONDENT'S ADMINISTRATIVE REVERSAL OF THE CHALLENGED DETERMINATION RENDERED THE PROCEEDING MOOT; App. Div. dismissed as moot a CPLR article 78 petition seeking review of respondent's determination finding petitioner guilty of violating certain disciplinary rules; denied petitioner's motion for costs and disbursements; and denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration.

JAMAL S., MATTER OF (123 AD3d 429):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 12/4/14; reversal with a two-Justice dissent; sua sponte examination whether the two-justice dissent at the App. Div. is on a question of law; CRIMES - UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE - WHETHER THE POLICE SEARCH, WHICH INVOLVED REQUIRING THE JUVENILE TO REMOVE HIS SHOES WHILE HE WAS HELD IN TEMPORARY DETENTION PENDING HIS MOTHER'S ARRIVAL AT THE POLICE STATION, WAS REASONABLE; Family Court, Bronx County, adjudicated Jamal S. a juvenile delinquent upon his admission that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and placed him on probation; App. Div. reversed the adjudication of juvenile delinquency, vacated the dispositional order, granted the motion to suppress, and dismissed the petition.

THOMAS v GRAY (121 AD3d 1091):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 10/29/14; reversal; sua sponte examination whether substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right and whether the App. Div. order finally determines the action; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE - LEASE WITH PURCHASE OPTION - CAPACITY OF SIGNATORY TO LEASE - WHETHER ALCOHOL FURNISHED BY ONE SIGNATORY IMPAIRED THE CAPACITY OF OTHER, ALCOHOLIC SIGNATORY TO A LEASE AGREEMENT SO THAT THE LEASE AGREEMENT WAS INVALID; Supreme Court, Kings County, in effect dismissed the complaint; App. Div. reversed, reinstated the complaint, and remitted to Supreme Court for entry of an amended judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant on the cause of action for specific performance of the purchase option clause of the lease agreement.

For February 20, 2015 through February 26, 2015, the following preliminary appeal statements were filed:

JOHNSON (KEITH), PEOPLE v (123 AD3d 573):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 12/16/14; reversal; leave to appeal granted by DeGrasse, J., 2/17/15; CRIMES - HARMLESS AND PREJUDICIAL ERROR - ADMISSION IN EVIDENCE AT JOINT TRIAL OF CODEFENDANT'S STATEMENTS IMPLICATING DEFENDANT - FACIALLY INCRIMINATING STATEMENT - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION CORRECTLY HELD THAT THE CONFESSION OF THE NONTESTIFYING CODEFENDANT INTRODUCED AT THEIR JOINT TRIAL WAS FACIALLY INCRIMINATING SUCH THAT DEFENDANT WAS DEPRIVED OF HIS SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT OF CONFRONTATION UNDER BRUTON v UNITED STATES (391 US 123 [1968]); WHETHER THE ALLEGED ERROR WAS HARMLESS; Supreme Court, Bronx County, convicted defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, petit larceny, menacing in the second degree, and possession of an imitation pistol, and sentenced him to an aggregate term of five years; App. Div. reversed and remanded the matter for a new trial.

LEACH (RAYMOND), PEOPLE v (115 AD3d 677):
2nd Dept. App. Div. order of 3/5/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Pigott, J., 2/3/15; CRIMES - FITNESS TO PROCEED TO TRIAL - WHETHER THE APPELLATE DIVISION CORRECTLY CONCLUDED THAT THE RECORD BELIED DEFENDANT'S CONTENTION THAT HE WAS MENTALLY INCOMPETENT TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM; ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT - WAIVER OF RIGHT TO APPEAL - WHETHER DEFENDANT'S WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WAS VOLUNTARY, KNOWING AND INTELLIGENT; VALIDITY OF DEFENDANT'S GUILTY PLEA TO REDUCED CHARGE OF ATTEMPTED GRAND LARCENY IN THE THIRD DEGREE, WHERE THE PEOPLE "NEITHER FILED A REDUCED INDICTMENT NOR EXERCISED ANY OF THEIR OTHER OPTIONS PURSUANT TO CPL 210.20(6) WITHIN 30 DAYS FOLLOWING THE ENTRY" OF THE COUNTY COURT ORDER REDUCING CHARGE FROM GRAND LARCENY IN THE THIRD DEGREE; CHALLENGE TO SENTENCE AS EXCESSIVE - WHETHER DEFENDANT WAS DEPRIVED OF HIS RIGHT TO THE EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL; County Court, Orange County, convicted defendant, upon his guilty plea, of attempted grand larceny in the third degree, and imposed sentence; App. Div. affirmed.

LEUNG, MATTER OF v NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS (123 AD3d 1032):
2nd Dept. App. Div. judgment of 12/24/14; sua sponte examination of whether substantial constitutional question is directly involved to support an appeal as of right; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS - ILLEGAL RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS (ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK § 28-210.1) - IMPOSITION OF CIVIL PENALTIES (ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK § 28-202.1) - CHALLENGE TO AGENCY DETERMINATION THAT OWNER OF PREMISES LEGALLY APPROVED AS A TWO-FAMILY DWELLING VIOLATED SECTION 28-210.1 BY CONVERTING THE DWELLING INTO THREE SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCIES ON THE SECOND FLOOR - SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - ALLEGED FAILURE TO ESTABLISH THAT RESIDENCE WAS PHYSICALLY ALTERED - CHALLENGE TO DETERMINATION THAT PETITIONER FAILED TO REBUT REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION THAT NO COMMON HOUSEHOLD EXISTED - DUE PROCESS CHALLENGE TO DEFINITIONS OF FAMILY AS USED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE; App. Div. confirmed a determination of the Environmental Control Board of the City of New York dated 2/16/12, which affirmed a determination of an Administrative Law Judge dated 7/11/11, finding, after a hearing, that petitioner violated Administrative Code of the City of New York §§ 28-210.1 and 28-202.1; denied the CPLR article 78 petition; and dismissed the proceeding on the merits.

MILLENNIUM HOLDINGS, LLC v THE GLIDDEN COMPANY (121 AD3d 444):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/7/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 2/19/15; INSURANCE - SUBROGATION RIGHTS OF INSURER - ANTISUBROGATION RULE - WHETHER THE COURTS BELOW CORRECTLY HELD THAT THE ANTISUBROGATION RULE BARS THE INSURERS FROM RECOVERING CERTAIN PAYMENTS MADE TO THEIR INSURED, MILLENNIUM HOLDINGS LLC, FOR THE DEFENSE AND INDEMNIFICATION OF NONPARTY CLAIMS THAT RESULTED FROM LEAD-BASED PAINT EXPOSURE LITIGATION; Supreme Court, New York County, granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the claims of plaintiff Northern Assurance Company of America and intervenor-plaintiffs Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London and Certain London Market Insurance Companies; App. Div. affirmed.

ROGERS, MATTER OF v PRACK (118 AD3d 1223):
3rd Dept. App. Div. judgment of 6/26/14; confirmed determination; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 2/17/15; PRISONS AND PRISONERS - DISCIPLINE OF INMATES - INMATE FOUND GUILTY OF ASSAULTING STAFF, ENGAGING IN VIOLENT CONDUCT AND DISTURBING THE ORDER OF THE FACILITY - WHETHER THE PENALTY OF 60-MONTHS CONFINEMENT IN THE SPECIAL HOUSING UNIT (SHU) SHOCKS THE CONSCIENCE AND IS AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION AS A MATTER OF LAW - WHETHER PETITIONER'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED BY THE HEARING OFFICER'S DENIAL OF HIS REQUESTS TO CALL AN ADDITIONAL WITNESS AND TO PRESENT CERTAIN DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE; App. Div. confirmed a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules, and dismissed the CPLR article 78 petition.

SANGARAY v WEST RIVER ASSOCIATES, LLC (121 AD3d 602):
1st Dept. App. Div. order of 10/30/14; affirmance; leave to appeal granted by Court of Appeals, 2/19/15; NEGLIGENCE - SIDEWALKS - FAILURE TO MAINTAIN SIDEWALK IN REASONABLY SAFE CONDITION - PROPERTY OWNER LIABILITY UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF CITY OF NEW YORK § 7-210 FOR INJURIES ARISING OUT OF A TRIP AND FALL DUE TO A HEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN TWO ADJACENT FLAGS OF PAVEMENT ON A PUBLIC SIDEWALK - WHETHER SECTION 7-210 IMPOSES LIABILITY NOT ONLY ON OWNER OF PREMISES DIRECTLY ABUTTING HEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL OVER WHICH PLAINTIFF TRIPPED, BUT ALSO ON THE OWNER OF THE NEIGHBORING PREMISES WHERE OVER 90% OF THE LOWER OF THE TWO PAVEMENT FLAGS ALLEGEDLY WAS SITUATED - COMMON- LAW LIABILITY OF OWNER OF NEIGHBORING PREMISES; Supreme Court, New York County, granted the motion of defendant West River Associates, LLC for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims against it; App. Div. affirmed.