People v. Dancy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dancy

33 A.D.3d 396, 821 N.Y.S.2d 758

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

DecidedOctober 10, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.3d 396 (People v. Dancy) 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. Dancy, 33 A.D.3d 396, 821 N.Y.S.2d 758 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), rendered December 5, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]), including its rejection of defendant’s defense of temporary innocent possession.

Defendant’s other argument is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Nardelli, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), rendered December 5, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]), including its rejection of defendant’s defense of temporary innocent possession.

Defendant’s other argument is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Nardelli, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.3d 396, 821 N.Y.S.2d 758, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dancy-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack