People v. Caro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Caro

284 A.D.2d 210, 726 N.Y.S.2d 265, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6524

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

DecidedJune 19, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 210 (People v. Caro) 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. Caro, 284 A.D.2d 210, 726 N.Y.S.2d 265, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6524 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.), rendered September 7, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 3 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

[211]*211The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility, including its rejection of defendant’s testimony. The credible evidence warranted the inference that defendant knew the contents of the package he received (see, People v Reisman, 29 NY2d 278, 285). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.), rendered September 7, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 3 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

[211]*211The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility, including its rejection of defendant’s testimony. The credible evidence warranted the inference that defendant knew the contents of the package he received (see, People v Reisman, 29 NY2d 278, 285). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 210, 726 N.Y.S.2d 265, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-caro-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack