People v. Alejo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alejo

15 A.D.3d 276, 789 N.Y.S.2d 424, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1676

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.3d 276 (People v. Alejo) 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 v. Alejo, 15 A.D.3d 276, 789 N.Y.S.2d 424, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1676 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), rendered October 2, 2003, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and [277]*277unlawful possession of marijuana, and sentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years and a conditional discharge, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based upon legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the weight to be given to inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the court, and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). We do not find the police account of the transaction to be unbelievable. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Saxe, Friedman, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), rendered October 2, 2003, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and [277]*277unlawful possession of marijuana, and sentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years and a conditional discharge, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based upon legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the weight to be given to inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the court, and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). We do not find the police account of the transaction to be unbelievable. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Saxe, Friedman, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.3d 276, 789 N.Y.S.2d 424, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alejo-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack