People v. DeAngelo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. DeAngelo

129 A.D.2d 807, 514 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45501

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

DecidedApril 27, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 129 A.D.2d 807 (People v. DeAngelo) 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. DeAngelo, 129 A.D.2d 807, 514 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45501 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Di Tucci, J.), both rendered November 23, 1984, convicting him of criminal trespass in the second degree under indictment No. 401/84, and burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree under indictment No. 402/84, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The evidence presented was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed the necessary intent to commit the offenses charged. The issue of his alleged intoxication was charged to the jury, and upon this record there is no basis for rejecting its verdicts (see, Penal Law [808]*808§ 15.25; People v Lynch, 23 NY2d 262; People v Handly, 102 AD2d 922). Brown, J. P., Niehoff, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Di Tucci, J.), both rendered November 23, 1984, convicting him of criminal trespass in the second degree under indictment No. 401/84, and burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree under indictment No. 402/84, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The evidence presented was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed the necessary intent to commit the offenses charged. The issue of his alleged intoxication was charged to the jury, and upon this record there is no basis for rejecting its verdicts (see, Penal Law [808]*808§ 15.25; People v Lynch, 23 NY2d 262; People v Handly, 102 AD2d 922). Brown, J. P., Niehoff, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 A.D.2d 807, 514 N.Y.S.2d 658, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-deangelo-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack