People v. Bush

225 A.D.2d 705, 639 N.Y.2d 743, 639 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2669
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Bush. Read the opinion of the Court — 220 A.D.2d 607

Opinion

The defendant’s challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (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, 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]).

Further, the defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Bush, 225 A.D.2d 705, 639 N.Y.2d 743, 639 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2669 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

225 A.D.2d 705 (People v. Bush) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
People v. Udzinski
146 A.D.2d 245 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)