People v. Clayton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Clayton

284 A.D.2d 407, 726 N.Y.S.2d 282, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6053

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

DecidedJune 11, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 407 (People v. Clayton) 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. Clayton, 284 A.D.2d 407, 726 N.Y.S.2d 282, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6053 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered January 28, 2000, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a non-jury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally [408]*408insuffic" iblish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review. motion for dismissal was general in nature (see, Pe. inson, 251 AD2d 354; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 24k 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 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]). Ritter, J. P., S. Miller, Feuerstein and Schmidt, 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, Kings County (Gary, J.), rendered January 28, 2000, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a non-jury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally [408]*408insuffic" iblish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review. motion for dismissal was general in nature (see, Pe. inson, 251 AD2d 354; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 24k 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 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]). Ritter, J. P., S. Miller, Feuerstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 407, 726 N.Y.S.2d 282, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-clayton-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack