People v. Bab Lin You

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bab Lin You

264 A.D.2d 780, 694 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9135

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 20, 1999·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Spires, J.), rendered January 28, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree, attempted robbery in the first degree (two counts), attempted robbery in the second degree, and unlawful imprisonment in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in summarily denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict based on juror misconduct. The motion was supported only by hearsay allegations contained in an affidavit of defense counsel (see, People v Cervantes, 242 AD2d 730, 731).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Altman, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Schmidt, 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 (Spires, J.), rendered January 28, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree, attempted robbery in the first degree (two counts), attempted robbery in the second degree, and unlawful imprisonment in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in summarily denying, without a hearing, the defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict based on juror misconduct. The motion was supported only by hearsay allegations contained in an affidavit of defense counsel (see, People v Cervantes, 242 AD2d 730, 731).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Altman, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

People v. Bab Lin You, 264 A.D.2d 780, 694 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9135 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

264 A.D.2d 780 (People v. Bab Lin You) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related