People of State of New York v. Jennings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People of State of New York v. Jennings

220 A.D.2d 774, 633 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10523

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 220 A.D.2d 774 (People of State of New York v. Jennings) 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

People of State of New York v. Jennings, 220 A.D.2d 774, 633 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10523 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered August 4, 1994, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

[775]*775The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Ritter and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered August 4, 1994, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

[775]*775The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Ritter and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 A.D.2d 774, 633 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-of-state-of-new-york-v-jennings-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack