People v. Bullock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bullock

119 A.D.2d 992, 500 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55924

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

DecidedApril 4, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 119 A.D.2d 992 (People v. Bullock) 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. Bullock, 119 A.D.2d 992, 500 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55924 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of felony murder (Penal Law § 125.25 [3]) and first degree manslaughter (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]), defendant claims that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s summation and that the circumstantial evidence did not establish his guilt. The remarks made in summation were, for the most part, not preserved for review (People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818) and were factually supported in the record in any event. When the [993]*993circumstantial evidence in this case is viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196; People v Benzinger, 36 NY2d 29, 32) and the prosecution is given the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v Lewis, 64 NY2d 1111, 1112; People v Way, 59 NY2d 361, 365), the facts from which the inference of defendant’s guilt is drawn overwhelmingly establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, are inconsistent with his innocence and exclude to a moral certainty every other reasonable hypothesis (People v Morgan, 66 NY2d 255; People v Barnes, 50 NY2d 375, 380). We have reviewed the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Pine, J. — murder, second degree, and manslaughter, first degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Den-man, Green and O’Donnell, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of felony murder (Penal Law § 125.25 [3]) and first degree manslaughter (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]), defendant claims that he was denied a fair trial by the prosecutor’s summation and that the circumstantial evidence did not establish his guilt. The remarks made in summation were, for the most part, not preserved for review (People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818) and were factually supported in the record in any event. When the [993]*993circumstantial evidence in this case is viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Kennedy, 47 NY2d 196; People v Benzinger, 36 NY2d 29, 32) and the prosecution is given the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v Lewis, 64 NY2d 1111, 1112; People v Way, 59 NY2d 361, 365), the facts from which the inference of defendant’s guilt is drawn overwhelmingly establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, are inconsistent with his innocence and exclude to a moral certainty every other reasonable hypothesis (People v Morgan, 66 NY2d 255; People v Barnes, 50 NY2d 375, 380). We have reviewed the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Pine, J. — murder, second degree, and manslaughter, first degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Den-man, Green and O’Donnell, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 992, 500 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bullock-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack