People v. Clinton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Clinton

268 A.D.2d 531, 701 N.Y.S.2d 647, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 643

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

DecidedJanuary 24, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 268 A.D.2d 531 (People v. Clinton) 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. Clinton, 268 A.D.2d 531, 701 N.Y.S.2d 647, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered July 14, 1997, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and tampering with physical evidence, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and to disprove his defense of justification were not preserved for appellate review by his motion for a trial order of dismissal (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 20-21; People v Vella, 247 AD2d 642; People v Joseph, 243 AD2d 728; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). 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 the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and to disprove his justification defense 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]).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and H. Miller, 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 (McDonald, J.), rendered July 14, 1997, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and tampering with physical evidence, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contentions that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and to disprove his defense of justification were not preserved for appellate review by his motion for a trial order of dismissal (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 20-21; People v Vella, 247 AD2d 642; People v Joseph, 243 AD2d 728; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). 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 the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and to disprove his justification defense 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]).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 531, 701 N.Y.S.2d 647, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-clinton-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack