People v. Cruz

79 A.D.3d 1059, 912 N.Y.S.2d 891
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Cruz. Read the opinion of the Court — 53 A.D.3d 986

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Knopf, J.), rendered December 11, 2008, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prose[1060]*1060cution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 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, 348-349 [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]). Skelos, J.P., Balkin, Leventhal and Hall, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Cruz, 79 A.D.3d 1059, 912 N.Y.S.2d 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

79 A.D.3d 1059 (People v. Cruz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Mateo
811 N.E.2d 1053 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Danielson
880 N.E.2d 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
People v. Romero
859 N.E.2d 902 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Bleakley
508 N.E.2d 672 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)