People v. Adams

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Adams

505 N.E.2d 946, 69 N.Y.2d 805, 513 N.Y.S.2d 381, 1987 N.Y. LEXIS 15404

New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 17, 1987·Published·Cited by 48 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant complains that the trial court erred in charging the jury with respect to circumstantial evidence that some of the facts could be proved with less assurance than others. Although the language isolated by defendant was one of the bases for reversal in People v Ford (66 NY2d 428, 443), the charge as a whole adequately conveyed to the jury the appropriate standards (People v Ford, supra).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are not preserved for our review.

*807 Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant complains that the trial court erred in charging the jury with respect to circumstantial evidence that some of the facts could be proved with less assurance than others. Although the language isolated by defendant was one of the bases for reversal in People v Ford (66 NY2d 428, 443), the charge as a whole adequately conveyed to the jury the appropriate standards (People v Ford, supra).

Defendant’s remaining contentions are not preserved for our review.

*807 Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

People v. Adams, 505 N.E.2d 946, 69 N.Y.2d 805, 513 N.Y.S.2d 381, 1987 N.Y. LEXIS 15404 (N.Y. 1987).

Pincite

505 N.E.2d 946 (People v. Adams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related