People v. Broomfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Broomfield

275 A.D.2d 885, 714 N.Y.S.2d 921, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9643

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 275 A.D.2d 885 (People v. Broomfield) 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. Broomfield, 275 A.D.2d 885, 714 N.Y.S.2d 921, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [4]). The conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Contrary to defendant’s contention, “[tjhere is no requirement that defendant knew the weapon was loaded when he possessed it” (People v Smith, 270 AD2d 719). Further, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence. Upon our review of the record, we cannot say that the jury failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded (see, People v Bleakley, supra, at 495). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Cornelius, J. — Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Wisner, Scudder and Balio, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [4]). The conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Contrary to defendant’s contention, “[tjhere is no requirement that defendant knew the weapon was loaded when he possessed it” (People v Smith, 270 AD2d 719). Further, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence. Upon our review of the record, we cannot say that the jury failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded (see, People v Bleakley, supra, at 495). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Cornelius, J. — Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Wisner, Scudder and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 885, 714 N.Y.S.2d 921, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-broomfield-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack