People v. Daye

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Daye

104 A.D.2d 1003, 480 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20436

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 104 A.D.2d 1003 (People v. Daye) 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. Daye, 104 A.D.2d 1003, 480 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20436 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sharpe, J.), rendered May 14,1981, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Based on a review of the record, we find defendant’s guilt of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In particular, we find that the circumstantial evidence in the present case amply supports the jury’s determination that defendant was knowingly in recent possession of the car previously reported stolen (see People v Roman, 12 NY2d 220, 222). On this appeal, defendant challenges the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury that his apparent flight from the stolen car was weak and ambiguous evidence of guilt. Defendant, however, neither requested such a charge nor excepted to the court’s charge on this ground. Accordingly, this issue was not preserved for review as a matter of law (see CPL 470.05, subd 2; People v Thomas, 50 NY2d 467; People v Giles, 87 AD2d 636). Titone, J. P., Bracken, Boyers and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sharpe, J.), rendered May 14,1981, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Based on a review of the record, we find defendant’s guilt of criminal possession of stolen property in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In particular, we find that the circumstantial evidence in the present case amply supports the jury’s determination that defendant was knowingly in recent possession of the car previously reported stolen (see People v Roman, 12 NY2d 220, 222). On this appeal, defendant challenges the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury that his apparent flight from the stolen car was weak and ambiguous evidence of guilt. Defendant, however, neither requested such a charge nor excepted to the court’s charge on this ground. Accordingly, this issue was not preserved for review as a matter of law (see CPL 470.05, subd 2; People v Thomas, 50 NY2d 467; People v Giles, 87 AD2d 636). Titone, J. P., Bracken, Boyers and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 1003, 480 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-daye-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack