People v. Bradshaw

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bradshaw

216 A.D.2d 572, 628 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7013

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

DecidedJune 26, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 572 (People v. Bradshaw) 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. Bradshaw, 216 A.D.2d 572, 628 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7013 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Ain, J.), rendered March 20, 1992, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Initially it is noted that the defendant’s claim that the trial court’s jury charge on identification was prejudicial was not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, this contention is without merit. The County Court’s instruction clearly conveyed that it was the jury’s responsibility to assure that the defendant’s identification was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273). Thompson, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Florio, 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 County Court, Nassau County (Ain, J.), rendered March 20, 1992, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Initially it is noted that the defendant’s claim that the trial court’s jury charge on identification was prejudicial was not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, this contention is without merit. The County Court’s instruction clearly conveyed that it was the jury’s responsibility to assure that the defendant’s identification was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273). Thompson, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 572, 628 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bradshaw-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack