From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wesley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 25, 1997
238 A.D.2d 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Summary

holding that the defendant's use of an assumed name to obtain automobile insurance did not constitute the crime of forgery as his actions did not purport to be those of another

Summary of this case from State v. Sandoval

Opinion

April 25, 1997

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Lawton, Balio and Fallon, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, plea vacated and matter remitted to Ontario County Court for further proceedings on the indictment. Memorandum: Defendant was indicted on charges of forgery in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.10) and insurance fraud in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 176.10). In accordance with his plea bargain, defendant pleaded guilty to forgery in the second degree in full satisfaction of the indictment. He admitted that he signed an application for automobile insurance under the name "John E. Zopp", which he testified was an assumed name he had used in California and New York. On appeal, he contends that the acts alleged in the indictment and admitted during the plea allocution do not constitute the crime of forgery in the second degree. We agree.

"[T]he crime of forgery involves the making, altering, or completing of an instrument by someone other than the ostensible maker or drawer or an agent of the ostensible maker or drawer" ( People v. Levitan, 49 N.Y.2d 87, 90). Penal Law § 170.00 (4) describes when a person "`falsely makes'" a written instrument. "To come within the ambit of this section, it is necessary that the actual maker or drawer be someone other than the ostensible maker or drawer and that the actual maker or drawer not have the authority to act for the ostensible maker or drawer. The section has no application where, as here, the ostensible [maker] and the actual [maker] are in fact one and the same person" ( People v Levitan, supra, at 90-91). Because defendant is the same person as "John E. Zopp" and defendant did not intend to assume the identity of a different person by signing the name of "John E. Zopp", his conduct does not constitute forgery in the second degree ( see, People v. Johnson, 96 A.D.2d 1083, affd 63 N.Y.2d 888, rearg denied 64 N.Y.2d 647; People v. Briggins, 50 N.Y.2d 302; People v. Dunn, 185 A.D.2d 54, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 970; People v. Jackson, 139 A.D.2d 837, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 919). (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Harvey, J. — Forgery, 2nd Degree.)


Summaries of

People v. Wesley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 25, 1997
238 A.D.2d 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

holding that the defendant's use of an assumed name to obtain automobile insurance did not constitute the crime of forgery as his actions did not purport to be those of another

Summary of this case from State v. Sandoval
Case details for

People v. Wesley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES M. WESLEY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 25, 1997

Citations

238 A.D.2d 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
661 N.Y.S.2d 148

Citing Cases

State v. Sandoval

We hold that Defendant's actions do not constitute forgery as a matter of law and therefore reverse his…

People v. Cunningham

I. Gregory Cunningham's act of signing his own name to Herkimer Precut check number 10052 without…