The defendant in People v. Pierce (Ct. App. 2/16/2010) (Graffeo, J.) was charged in two separate felony complaints with (1) Grand Larceny 4º for tricking someone into giving him a bank card, which the defendant used to withdraw money from the victim's bank account; and (2) Criminal Possession of Stolen Property 4º for driving a stolen car. The defendant was held for action of the Grand Jury on each felony complaint. Nevertheless, the parties negotiated a plea bargain that spared the defendant from consecutive sentences and enabled him to plead guilty to Grand Larceny 4º and CPSP 3º and receive a concurrent sentence.
The defendant purported to waive indictment and plead guilty to a SCI charging the two felony offenses. On appeal, he claimed his waiver was invalid under both the CPL and the state Constitution.
First, he asserted his plea violated the rule in People v. Zanghi, 79 N.Y.2d 815 (1991), which the defendant claimed prohibited inclusion in an SCI of an offense higher in grade than the highest crime in the underlying felony complaint. The court rejected this interpretation of Zanghi, finding instead that the case stood for the proposition that the SCI must include, at a minimum, one of the offenses charged in the felony accusatory instrument. Here, the SCI satisfied this rule because it charged the defendant with Grand Larceny 4º, which was one of the charges in one of the felony complaints.
Second, the defendant claimed that the CPSP 3º charge was improperly joined under CPL § 200.20. Since the crime did not occur in the same criminal transaction, the People could not rely on CPL § 200.20(2)(a). Instead, they tried to utilize section (c) of that statute, which permits joinder of "offenses [that] are defined by the same or similar statutory provisions and consequently are the same or similar in law." Here, they argued that the two offenses, although based on separate incidents, were both theft-related and thus properly joinable.
The court rejected this argument:
The defendant purported to waive indictment and plead guilty to a SCI charging the two felony offenses. On appeal, he claimed his waiver was invalid under both the CPL and the state Constitution.
First, he asserted his plea violated the rule in People v. Zanghi, 79 N.Y.2d 815 (1991), which the defendant claimed prohibited inclusion in an SCI of an offense higher in grade than the highest crime in the underlying felony complaint. The court rejected this interpretation of Zanghi, finding instead that the case stood for the proposition that the SCI must include, at a minimum, one of the offenses charged in the felony accusatory instrument. Here, the SCI satisfied this rule because it charged the defendant with Grand Larceny 4º, which was one of the charges in one of the felony complaints.
Second, the defendant claimed that the CPSP 3º charge was improperly joined under CPL § 200.20. Since the crime did not occur in the same criminal transaction, the People could not rely on CPL § 200.20(2)(a). Instead, they tried to utilize section (c) of that statute, which permits joinder of "offenses [that] are defined by the same or similar statutory provisions and consequently are the same or similar in law." Here, they argued that the two offenses, although based on separate incidents, were both theft-related and thus properly joinable.
The court rejected this argument:
Viewed in the broadest sense, both offenses involve misappropriated property — but that is where any similarity ends. The crimes do not have comparable elements and the essential nature of the criminal conduct is quite distinct, as is evident from the underlying allegations.Finding reversal was required on statutory grounds, the court declined to address the defendant's constitutional challenge to the joinder of offenses of higher grade than those present in the accusatory instrument. (LC)
Comments