People v. Dorsey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dorsey

282 A.D.2d 618, 723 N.Y.S.2d 401, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3769

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

DecidedApril 16, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 282 A.D.2d 618 (People v. Dorsey) 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. Dorsey, 282 A.D.2d 618, 723 N.Y.S.2d 401, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (F. Rivera, J.), rendered May 1, 1997, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence of physical injury was legally insufficient to establish that he committed the crime of assault in the second degree is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing [619]*619the evidence regarding the victim’s injuries, hospitalization, and treatment in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (F. Rivera, J.), rendered May 1, 1997, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence of physical injury was legally insufficient to establish that he committed the crime of assault in the second degree is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing [619]*619the evidence regarding the victim’s injuries, hospitalization, and treatment in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 618, 723 N.Y.S.2d 401, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dorsey-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack