In re Richard W.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Richard W.

225 A.D.2d 701, 639 N.Y.2d 939, 639 N.Y.S.2d 939, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2638

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 18, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 225 A.D.2d 701 (In re Richard W.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Richard W., 225 A.D.2d 701, 639 N.Y.2d 939, 639 N.Y.S.2d 939, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2638 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[702]*702Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Presentment Agency (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Olivo, 52 NY2d 309; People v Alamo, 34 NY2d 453). Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the finder of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the finding of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (cf., CPL 470.15 [5]). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, O’Brien and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[702]*702Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Presentment Agency (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Olivo, 52 NY2d 309; People v Alamo, 34 NY2d 453). Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the finder of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the finding of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (cf., CPL 470.15 [5]). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, O’Brien and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D.2d 701, 639 N.Y.2d 939, 639 N.Y.S.2d 939, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-richard-w-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack