From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Quinlan

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
May 14, 2019
63 Misc. 3d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Summary

In Ryan v. Quinlan, 45 Mont. 521, 124 P. 512, the defendants' contentions were surprisingly like those of the defendants here, which are therefore not new. The parties to that suit had been parties to another adjudication of the waters of Dempsey Creek made in 1902.

Summary of this case from Kramer v. Deer Lodge Farms Co.

Opinion

570765/17

05-14-2019

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, 570334/18 v. Ryan QUINLAN, Defendant-Appellant. 18-189


Per Curiam.

Judgments of convictions (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), each rendered August 28, 2017, affirmed.

Defendant argues that his guilty plea to the charge of criminal contempt in the second degree was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent. Significantly, however, the only relief defendant requests is dismissal of the accusatory instrument rather than a remand for further proceedings, and he expressly requests this Court to affirm his conviction if it does not grant a dismissal. Since we are not prepared to dismiss an accusatory instrument charging, inter alia, endangering the welfare of a child, second-degree criminal contempt and resisting arrest, as requested by defendant, we affirm on this basis (see People v. Conceicao , 26 NY3d 375, 385 n 1 [2015] ; People v. Teron , 139 AD3d 450 [2016] ). In any event, we also find that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered his negotiated plea of guilty with the assistance of counsel, in exchange for a very favorable disposition.


Summaries of

People v. Quinlan

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
May 14, 2019
63 Misc. 3d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

In Ryan v. Quinlan, 45 Mont. 521, 124 P. 512, the defendants' contentions were surprisingly like those of the defendants here, which are therefore not new. The parties to that suit had been parties to another adjudication of the waters of Dempsey Creek made in 1902.

Summary of this case from Kramer v. Deer Lodge Farms Co.

In Ryan v. Quinlan, 45 Mont. 521, 124 P. 512, 515, Mr. Chief Justice Brantly, speaking for the court, said: "When water seeps into the earth, it mingles with the soil and remains suspended therein, or moves through it either by percolation, thus losing its identity as a flowing stream, or passes away by one or more defined channels. It has been settled by a long line of decisions that percolating water is not governed by the same rules that are applied to running streams.

Summary of this case from Rock Creek Ditch Etc. Co. v. Miller
Case details for

People v. Quinlan

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ryan Quinlan…

Court:SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

Date published: May 14, 2019

Citations

63 Misc. 3d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 50720
115 N.Y.S.3d 604

Citing Cases

West Side Ditch Co. v. Bennett

" In Montana, particularly, the question is not open to argument. ( Ryan v. Quinlan, 45 Mont. 521, 124 P.…

Woodward v. Perkins

Its identity and its ownership then become the same as that of the soil of which it forms a part. ( Ryan v.…