People v. Aucter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Aucter

107 A.D.2d 1008, 486 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42821

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 29, 1985·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In our view, the court’s instruction on the issue of identification was sufficiently detailed to enable the jury to apply the correct rules of law. In any event, defendant did not properly take exception to the charge on identification (see People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273, 280). Moreover, the victim’s identification of defendant was not the sole evidence connecting defendant with the commission of the crime but merely a part of the overwhelming case against him. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Cornelius, J. — burglary, first degree, and other charges.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In our view, the court’s instruction on the issue of identification was sufficiently detailed to enable the jury to apply the correct rules of law. In any event, defendant did not properly take exception to the charge on identification (see People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273, 280). Moreover, the victim’s identification of defendant was not the sole evidence connecting defendant with the commission of the crime but merely a part of the overwhelming case against him. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Cornelius, J. — burglary, first degree, and other charges.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

People v. Aucter, 107 A.D.2d 1008, 486 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42821 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

107 A.D.2d 1008 (People v. Aucter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related