People v. Carrion

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Carrion

133 A.D.3d 610, 18 N.Y.S.3d 550

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

DecidedNovember 4, 2015

Docket2013-09482

StatusPublished

This text of 133 A.D.3d 610 (People v. Carrion) 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. Carrion, 133 A.D.3d 610, 18 N.Y.S.3d 550 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Condon, J.), rendered September 27, 2013, convicting him of attempted robbery in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]; People v Gumbs, 58 AD3d 641, 641 [2009]; People v Crawford, 38 AD3d 680, 681 [2007]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Dillon, J.P., Miller, Duffy and LaSalle, 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, Suffolk County (Condon, J.), rendered September 27, 2013, convicting him of attempted robbery in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]; People v Gumbs, 58 AD3d 641, 641 [2009]; People v Crawford, 38 AD3d 680, 681 [2007]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Dillon, J.P., Miller, Duffy and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 A.D.3d 610, 18 N.Y.S.3d 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-carrion-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack