People v. Broussard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Broussard

186 A.D.2d 384, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11189

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 384 (People v. Broussard) 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. Broussard, 186 A.D.2d 384, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

[385]*385Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, and giving due deference to the jury’s findings of credibility under the standards set forth in People v Bleakley (69 NY2d 490), defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The issues raised by defendant concerning the credibility of the complaining witness were placed before the jury, and we find no reason to disturb its determination. We also find no merit to defendant’s unpreserved argument that the prosecutor improperly argued critical facts not in evidence. The prosecutor’s slight error in recalling the testimony of a defense witness was harmless. Finally, defendant received an appropriate sentence for his three separate attacks upon the complaining witness. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

[385]*385Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, and giving due deference to the jury’s findings of credibility under the standards set forth in People v Bleakley (69 NY2d 490), defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The issues raised by defendant concerning the credibility of the complaining witness were placed before the jury, and we find no reason to disturb its determination. We also find no merit to defendant’s unpreserved argument that the prosecutor improperly argued critical facts not in evidence. The prosecutor’s slight error in recalling the testimony of a defense witness was harmless. Finally, defendant received an appropriate sentence for his three separate attacks upon the complaining witness. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 384, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-broussard-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack