People v. Britt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Britt

245 A.D.2d 294, 670 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12057

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

DecidedDecember 1, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 245 A.D.2d 294 (People v. Britt) 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. Britt, 245 A.D.2d 294, 670 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12057 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered July 29, 1996, convicting him of attempted murder in the second 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 establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the [295]*295prosecution (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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). 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 remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Copertino and Goldstein, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered July 29, 1996, convicting him of attempted murder in the second 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 establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the [295]*295prosecution (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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88). 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 remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Copertino and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 294, 670 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12057, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-britt-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack