People v. Crews

74 A.D.3d 983, 902 N.Y.S.2d 380
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 8, 2010
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 74 A.D.3d 983 (People v. Crews) 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. Crews, 74 A.D.3d 983, 902 N.Y.S.2d 380 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hinrichs, J.), rendered April 22, 2008, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, in the context of this case, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in precluding expert testimony on false confessions (see People v Ragsdale, 68 AD3d 897 [2009]; cf. People v Lee, 96 NY2d 157, 162 [2001]; People v Herrnkind, 49 AD3d 555 [2008]; People v [984]*984Green, 250 AD2d 143, 146-147 [1998]; People v Lea, 144 AD2d 863, 864-865 [1988]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are without merit or do not warrant reversal. Fisher, J.P., Covello, Hall and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Oliver
45 Misc. 3d 765 (New York Supreme Court, 2014)
People v. Mutterperl
97 A.D.3d 699 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Bedessie
78 A.D.3d 960 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 A.D.3d 983, 902 N.Y.S.2d 380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-crews-nyappdiv-2010.