People v Jones
Annotate this Case
People v Jones
2013 NY Slip Op 07380
Released on November 8, 2013
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Released on November 8, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND VALENTINO, JJ.
1158 KA 09-02093
[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v
BRUCE W. JONES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John R. Schwartz, A.J.), rendered August 31, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the fourth degree.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JANET C. SOMES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN X. O'BRIEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed as moot (see People v Griffin, 239 AD2d 936).
Entered: November 8, 2013
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Released on November 8, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND VALENTINO, JJ.
1158 KA 09-02093
[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v
BRUCE W. JONES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John R. Schwartz, A.J.), rendered August 31, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the fourth degree.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JANET C. SOMES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN X. O'BRIEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed as moot (see People v Griffin, 239 AD2d 936).
Entered: November 8, 2013
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
