People v. Castillo
This text of 215 A.D.2d 574 (People v. Castillo) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered July 28, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v [575]*575Bynum, 70 NY2d 858; People v Okehoffurum, 201 AD2d 508; cf., People v Hill, 85 NY2d 252). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt both the defendant’s identity and that he knew the weight of the drugs (see, People v Ryan, 82 NY2d 497, 505; People v Dillon, 207 AD2d 793; People v Okehoffurum, supra). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Sullivan, J. P., Copertino, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
215 A.D.2d 574, 627 N.Y.S.2d 940, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-castillo-nyappdiv-1995.