People v. Barry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barry

95 A.D.3d 558, 943 N.Y.S.2d 748

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

DecidedMay 10, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 95 A.D.3d 558 (People v. Barry) 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. Barry, 95 A.D.3d 558, 943 N.Y.S.2d 748 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Eileen Koretz, J.H.O.), rendered January 12, 2010, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted aggravated harassment in the second degree, and sentencing him to a conditional discharge, unanimously affirmed.

[559]*559The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations. The fact that the court acquitted defendant of other charges does not warrant a different conclusion (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). The absence of a translation of certain tape recordings was satisfactorily explained and does not warrant an adverse inference against the People. Concur— Tom, J.P., Andrias, Catterson, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Eileen Koretz, J.H.O.), rendered January 12, 2010, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted aggravated harassment in the second degree, and sentencing him to a conditional discharge, unanimously affirmed.

[559]*559The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations. The fact that the court acquitted defendant of other charges does not warrant a different conclusion (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). The absence of a translation of certain tape recordings was satisfactorily explained and does not warrant an adverse inference against the People. Concur— Tom, J.P., Andrias, Catterson, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 A.D.3d 558, 943 N.Y.S.2d 748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barry-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack