PEOPLE, res, v. DAVID LINEBERGER, def-app

570511/12. PEOPLE, res, v. DAVID LINEBERGER, def-app — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Judgment of conviction (Marc J. Whiten, J.), rendered March 20, 2012, affirmed.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

570511/12. PEOPLE, res, v. DAVID LINEBERGER, def-app — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Judgment of conviction (Marc J. Whiten, J.), rendered March 20, 2012, affirmed.

Defendant pled guilty to one count of fraudulent accosting in satisfaction of an accusatory instrument charging him with two counts each of fraudulent accosting (see Penal Law §165.30[1]) and possession of an imitation controlled substance with intent to sell (see Public Health Law §3383[2]). We reject defendant’s sole appellate argument that the accusatory instrument is facially insufficient to support the fraudulent accosting charge to which he pleaded guilty. Defendant does not dispute that he waived prosecution by information (see People v. Dumay, 23 NY3d 518 [2014]), nor that the accusatory instrument described “facts of an evidentiary character” (CPL 100.15[3]) demonstrating “reasonable cause” to believe (CPL 100.40[4][b]) that he was guilty of the charged crime of possession of an imitation controlled substance with intent to sell (Public Health Law §3383[2]). The court thus had jurisdiction over defendant and was authorized to accept defendant’s plea to the charged offense of fraudulent accosting (see People v. Keizer, 100 NY2d 114, 117-118 [2003]; CPL 220.10[4]).

PEOPLE, res, v. DAVID LINEBERGER, def-app

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal