People v. Bowler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bowler

61 A.D.3d 546, 876 N.Y.S.2d 647

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

DecidedApril 21, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 61 A.D.3d 546 (People v. Bowler) 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. Bowler, 61 A.D.3d 546, 876 N.Y.S.2d 647 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John W. Carter, J.), rendered March 20, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first and third degrees, criminal trespass in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The 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 jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence, including medical testimony regarding the victim’s injuries, clearly established that the stabbing was intentional and not accidental.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.R, Sweeny, Catterson and Freedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John W. Carter, J.), rendered March 20, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first and third degrees, criminal trespass in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The 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 jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence, including medical testimony regarding the victim’s injuries, clearly established that the stabbing was intentional and not accidental.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Friedman, J.R, Sweeny, Catterson and Freedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 A.D.3d 546, 876 N.Y.S.2d 647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bowler-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack