People v. Krennen
Cases that cite this one
21 later published cases cite this decision.
- Bradford v. Lefkowitz (District Court, S.D. New York 1965)
- In re Garceau's Petition (Vt. 1965)
- State v. Blacker (Or. 1963)
- People v. Carignan (New York County Courts 1962)
- People v. Griffin (N.Y. 1960)
- People ex rel. Small v. Shaw (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1951)
- People ex rel. Dent v. Martin (New York Supreme Court 1946)
- Matter of Lyons v. Robinson (N.Y. 1944)
- People ex rel. Schoen v. Murphy (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1935)
- Hearst Corp. v. Clyne (N.Y. 1980)
- People v. Ortiz (New York Supreme Court 1966)
- People v. Quinn (New York Court of General Session of the Peace 1957)
- People v. Chu (New York Court of General Session of the Peace 1949)
- People v. Whitman (New York Court of General Session of the Peace 1945)
- People v. Bigley (New York Supreme Court 1942)
- People ex rel. DeBernardo v. Martin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1941)
- People v. Sandoval (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1941)
- People v. Van Orden (New York County Courts 1940)
- People Ex Rel. Romano v. Brophy (N.Y. 1939)
- People ex rel. Fiannaca v. Hunt (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1939)
- People Ex Rel. Lorraine v. Lawes (N.Y. 1937)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Defendant was indicted for the crime of robbery in the first degree, which charged that he was armed with a loaded pistol.
He pleaded guilty of robbery third degree. Then, as appears by the clerk’s minutes, “ After taking testimony, the court adjudicates that the defendant was armed with a pistol during the commission of the crime.”
Because defendant was armed with a pistol during the commission of the crime, five to ten years were added to his sentence, under Penal Law, section 1944.
The plea of guilty was of the same effect as a verdict of conviction by a jury. This amounted to a conviction of robbery while unarmed. (Penal Law, § 2128.)
On such a conviction the judge would consider the question of increased punishment before imposing sentence. The proper procedure is laid down in People v. Caruso (249 N. Y. 302, 305). “ If in the act of committing any felony the defendant be armed with a dangerous weapon, his punishment is increased.” “ The Convicted defendant, who was armed, must in every instance receive a prison sentence for the felony plus an additional term for carrying the weapon.” (People v. Procito, 261 N. Y. 376, 379; Matter of Dodd v. Martin, 248 N. Y. 394.)
After plea, the judge should conduct an inquiry and take testimony, if necessary, before passing sentence.
On the trial of the indictment for robbery, first degree, the People would have to prove the fact that defendant was armed with a dangerous weapon in order to establish the offense charged, but on a verdict or plea of robbery, third degree, the judge makes the necessary inquiry to determine whether the increased punishment should be *110 inflicted. The fact that defendant was armed with a dangerous weapon during the commission of the crime is no part of the crime itself.
The judgment should be affirmed.
Crane, Lehman, O’Brien, Hhbbs and Crouch, JJ., concur; Kellogg, J., not sitting.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.