People v. Candelario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Candelario

119 A.D.2d 585, 500 N.Y.S.2d 754, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55514

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

DecidedApril 7, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 119 A.D.2d 585 (People v. Candelario) 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. Candelario, 119 A.D.2d 585, 500 N.Y.S.2d 754, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered July 9, 1984, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The court could have determined, based on the complainant’s testimony, that there was a reasonable doubt as to whether there was penetration, and therefore acquitted the defendant on the rape count. Nonetheless, the court may have concluded that the incident did otherwise occur, as testified to, which would support the conviction for sexual abuse in the first degree. The complainant’s testimony was not incredible as a matter of law (see, People v Africk, 107 AD2d 700). Therefore, under the circumstances, the conviction should stand.

The defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Rubin, Eiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered July 9, 1984, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The court could have determined, based on the complainant’s testimony, that there was a reasonable doubt as to whether there was penetration, and therefore acquitted the defendant on the rape count. Nonetheless, the court may have concluded that the incident did otherwise occur, as testified to, which would support the conviction for sexual abuse in the first degree. The complainant’s testimony was not incredible as a matter of law (see, People v Africk, 107 AD2d 700). Therefore, under the circumstances, the conviction should stand.

The defendant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Rubin, Eiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 585, 500 N.Y.S.2d 754, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-candelario-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack