People v. Biondolillo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Biondolillo

293 A.D.2d 754, 741 N.Y.S.2d 438, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4095

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

DecidedApril 29, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 293 A.D.2d 754 (People v. Biondolillo) 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. Biondolillo, 293 A.D.2d 754, 741 N.Y.S.2d 438, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4095 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered March 7, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court committed reversible error in denying his challenge for cause to a prospective juror is without merit. The challenged juror’s responses to questions by the Supreme Court and the defense counsel [755]*755did not indicate that he would be unable to render an impartial verdict based solely on the evidence adduced at trial (see CPL 270.20 [1] [b]; People v Johnson, 285 AD2d 517; People v Wilson, 279 AD2d 540, 541). O’Brien, J.P., Friedmann, Schmidt and Townes, 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, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered March 7, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court committed reversible error in denying his challenge for cause to a prospective juror is without merit. The challenged juror’s responses to questions by the Supreme Court and the defense counsel [755]*755did not indicate that he would be unable to render an impartial verdict based solely on the evidence adduced at trial (see CPL 270.20 [1] [b]; People v Johnson, 285 AD2d 517; People v Wilson, 279 AD2d 540, 541). O’Brien, J.P., Friedmann, Schmidt and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 754, 741 N.Y.S.2d 438, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-biondolillo-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack