People v Isakov, Mikhail, also known as Izaikov, Mikhail, als
Motion No: 2012-04332
Slip Opinion No: 2013 NY Slip Op 84423(U)
Decided on September 5, 2013
Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports.


Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division : Second Judicial Department

M161834

S/nl

SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX, J.

2012-04332

The People, etc., respondent, v Mikhail Isakov,

also known as Mikhail Izaikov, also known as

Mikhail Izraikov, appellant.

(Appeal No. 1)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

2012-04333

The People, etc., respondent,

v Arthur Ibragimov, appellant.

(Appeal No. 2)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-04334

The People, etc., respondent, v David Ibragimov,

also known as David Ibragmchayev, appellant.

(Appeal No. 3)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-04338

The People, etc., respondent,

v MB Globus, LLC, appellant.

(Appeal No. 4)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-04339

The People, etc., respondent,

v AN International, LLC, appellant.

(Appeal No. 5)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-04340

The People, etc., respondent,

v MA Concord, LLC, appellant.

(Appeal No. 6)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-04341

The People, etc., respondent,

v NA Continental Group, LLC, appellant.

(Appeal No. 7)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-04346

The People, etc., respondent,

v SI Premier Enterprises, LLC, appellant.

(Appeal No. 8)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

2012-02821

The People, etc., respondent,

v Jan Gilbert, appellant.

(Appeal No. 9)

(Ind. No. 9283/10)

Motion by the appellant Jan Gilbert on appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 28, 2012, five judgments of the same court rendered April 4, 2012, and three judgments of the same court rendered April 5, 2013, pursuant to CPL 460.50 to stay so much of the judgment rendered February 28, 2012, as directed him to pay restitution in the sum of $20,000.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied.

SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX

Associate Justice