People v. Camacho

97 A.D.3d 601, 947 N.Y.2d 322
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Camacho. Read the opinion of the Court — 70 A.D.3d 1393

Opinion

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt of resisting arrest beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of [602]*602the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt on that count was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Angiolillo, J.P., Belen, Chambers and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Camacho, 97 A.D.3d 601, 947 N.Y.2d 322 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

97 A.D.3d 601 (People v. Camacho) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Mateo
811 N.E.2d 1053 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Romero
859 N.E.2d 902 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)