People v. Bloom

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bloom

103 A.D.3d 1245, 958 N.Y.S.2d 919

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

DecidedFebruary 8, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 103 A.D.3d 1245 (People v. Bloom) 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. Bloom, 103 A.D.3d 1245, 958 N.Y.S.2d 919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered June 3, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of grand larceny in the fourth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30 [1]). As defendant correctly concedes, his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction is not preserved for our review because defendant failed to renew his motion for a trial order of dismissal after presenting proof (see People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]). In any event, defendant’s contention lacks merit (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]) and, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant’s further contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). “[T]he jury was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and, on this record, it cannot be said that the jury failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded” (People v Orta, 12 AD3d 1147, 1147 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 801 [2005]).

Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present— Smith, J.E, Peradotto, Lindley, Whalen and Martoche, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered June 3, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of grand larceny in the fourth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30 [1]). As defendant correctly concedes, his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction is not preserved for our review because defendant failed to renew his motion for a trial order of dismissal after presenting proof (see People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]). In any event, defendant’s contention lacks merit (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]) and, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant’s further contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). “[T]he jury was in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and, on this record, it cannot be said that the jury failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded” (People v Orta, 12 AD3d 1147, 1147 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 801 [2005]).

Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present— Smith, J.E, Peradotto, Lindley, Whalen and Martoche, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 A.D.3d 1245, 958 N.Y.S.2d 919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bloom-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack