People v. Bell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bell

47 A.D.3d 441, 848 N.Y.S.2d 534

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

DecidedJanuary 10, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.3d 441 (People v. Bell) 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. Bell, 47 A.D.3d 441, 848 N.Y.S.2d 534 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered October 11, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of six years and 2 to 4 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The evidence at trial was sufficient to establish the “display” element of attempted robbery in the second degree (see Penal Law § 160.10 [2] [b]; People v Lopez, 73 NY2d 214, 220-222 [1989]; People v Baskerville, 60 NY2d 374, 381 [1983]; People v Simmons, 186 AD2d 95, 97 [1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 976 [1993]), and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]).

We perceive no basis to reduce the sentence. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Williams, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered October 11, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted robbery in the second and third degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of six years and 2 to 4 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The evidence at trial was sufficient to establish the “display” element of attempted robbery in the second degree (see Penal Law § 160.10 [2] [b]; People v Lopez, 73 NY2d 214, 220-222 [1989]; People v Baskerville, 60 NY2d 374, 381 [1983]; People v Simmons, 186 AD2d 95, 97 [1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 976 [1993]), and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]).

We perceive no basis to reduce the sentence. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.3d 441, 848 N.Y.S.2d 534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bell-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack