People v. Asklund

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Asklund

16 A.D.2d 817, 228 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9578

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

DecidedMay 21, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.2d 817 (People v. Asklund) 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. Asklund, 16 A.D.2d 817, 228 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9578 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered August 10, 1961 after a jury trial, convicting him of grand larceny in the first degree (Penal Law, § 1293-a), and sentencing him to a term not to exceed five years. Judgment affirmed. In our opinion, the conviction is amply supported by the evidence. The witness who identified defendant as the driver of the stolen vehicle was positive in his identification; and any question as the credibility of such witness was for the jury to decide. Moreover, the direct evidence of defendant’s possession of the stolen vehicle, and of his unexplained presence therein justified the inference that defendant either stole the vehicle or knew that it was stolen (People v. Galbo, 218 N. Y 283). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Hill, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered August 10, 1961 after a jury trial, convicting him of grand larceny in the first degree (Penal Law, § 1293-a), and sentencing him to a term not to exceed five years. Judgment affirmed. In our opinion, the conviction is amply supported by the evidence. The witness who identified defendant as the driver of the stolen vehicle was positive in his identification; and any question as the credibility of such witness was for the jury to decide. Moreover, the direct evidence of defendant’s possession of the stolen vehicle, and of his unexplained presence therein justified the inference that defendant either stole the vehicle or knew that it was stolen (People v. Galbo, 218 N. Y 283). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Hill, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.2d 817, 228 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-asklund-nyappdiv-1962.