People v. Cestone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cestone

216 A.D.2d 483, 628 N.Y.S.2d 552

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

DecidedJune 19, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 483 (People v. Cestone) 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. Cestone, 216 A.D.2d 483, 628 N.Y.S.2d 552 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), rendered June 2, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (two counts), after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his possession of forged instruments is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 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]). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Krausman, 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 (Posner, J.), rendered June 2, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (two counts), after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his possession of forged instruments is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 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]). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 483, 628 N.Y.S.2d 552, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cestone-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack