New York's highest court has distinguished criminal possession of a
weapon with the intent to use element, Penal Law § 265.03, from other
weapon possession crimes defined in Article 265 of the Penal Law by finding
that the single act of continuously displaying a weapon before two or more
individuals during one criminal transaction can result in being charged with
multiple counts that can lead to consecutive punishment.

The questions presented are:

1. Whether New York, by allowing consecutive sentences for the
single continuous possession of the same firearm, ignored its own
precedent in Johnson v. Morgenthau, misapplied decisions from
this Court, and misinterpreted the intent of the legislature.

2. Whether a single business robbery where two or more employees are
threatened should be prosecuted and punished as a unitary
transaction.

3. Whether a post-judgment motion can be summarily denied without
articulating a sufficient basis for that denial.

Whether New York, by allowing consecutive sentences for the single continuous possession of the same firearm, ignored its own precedent in Johnson v. Morgenthau, misapplied decisions from this Court, and misinterpreted the intent of the legislature