People v. Canizares

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Canizares

308 A.D.2d 421, 764 N.Y.S.2d 825, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9933

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 308 A.D.2d 421 (People v. Canizares) 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. Canizares, 308 A.D.2d 421, 764 N.Y.S.2d 825, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9933 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Margaret Clancy, J.), rendered April 16, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 3V2 years with five years postrelease supervision, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of identification and credibility were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. We note that the victim made a prompt, spontaneous and reliable identification of defendant. The victim’s testimony as to the extent and duration of his injuries satisfied the requisite element of physical injury (see People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636 [1994]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Margaret Clancy, J.), rendered April 16, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 3V2 years with five years postrelease supervision, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of identification and credibility were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. We note that the victim made a prompt, spontaneous and reliable identification of defendant. The victim’s testimony as to the extent and duration of his injuries satisfied the requisite element of physical injury (see People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636 [1994]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

308 A.D.2d 421, 764 N.Y.S.2d 825, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-canizares-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack