People v. Biggs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Biggs

77 A.D.3d 764, 908 N.Y.S.2d 597

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

DecidedOctober 12, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 77 A.D.3d 764 (People v. Biggs) 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. Biggs, 77 A.D.3d 764, 908 N.Y.S.2d 597 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered April 18, 2008, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds (see CPL 30.30). The Supreme Court properly excluded from the time chargeable to the People the period from June 4, 2007, to June 12, 2007, because defense counsel was not ready to proceed until 2:00 p.m. on June 4, 2007. Eight days was a reasonable period of time thereafter for the People to reschedule the testimony of the police witness who had been due to testify on June 4, 2007 (see CPL 30.30 [4] [a]). Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, 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 (Blumenfeld, J.), rendered April 18, 2008, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds (see CPL 30.30). The Supreme Court properly excluded from the time chargeable to the People the period from June 4, 2007, to June 12, 2007, because defense counsel was not ready to proceed until 2:00 p.m. on June 4, 2007. Eight days was a reasonable period of time thereafter for the People to reschedule the testimony of the police witness who had been due to testify on June 4, 2007 (see CPL 30.30 [4] [a]). Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 A.D.3d 764, 908 N.Y.S.2d 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-biggs-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack